EAT Sex Discrimination : Direct – Pregnancy and discrimination
The Claimant appealed against the Employment Tribunal’s dismissal of her complaints of direct sex discrimination and/or pregnancy and maternity discrimination under ss. 13 and 18 of the Equality Act 2010. She was dismissed for periods of absence due to post-natal depression arising after her period of maternity leave ended and therefore outside the protected period. Consideration of the ECJ decisions in Hertz, Larsson and Brown v Rentokil and the EAT (Scotland) decision in Caledonia Bureau Investment v Caffrey (decided before Brown). The ET’s decision to reject her claims was upheld.
A second ground of appeal concerned the ET’s finding that there should be a Polkey reduction of 50%. The ET’s decision was found to disclose no error and was also upheld.
Cox DBE J
[2014] UKEAT 0348 – 13 – 1401
Bailii
Equality Act 2010 13 18
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.522138
