This is a preview. To continue reading please log in or Register to read this article

Case round-up: sex discrimination and ballots for strike action

This report relates to 2 case(s)

  • expand disabled

    P v National Association of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers [2003] IRLR 307 HL (0 other reports)

  • expand

    Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2003] IRLR 285 HL (3 other reports)

    • Lords set the standard for sex discrimination claims

      Date:
      1 July 2003

      Claimants for sexual discrimination must have an appropriate actual or hypothetical comparator to back up their case. Otherwise, the claim will prove unsuccessful. By Jill Kelly, Associate, Clarks.

    • Sex discrimination: The comparison exercise in direct sex discrimination claims

      Date:
      9 May 2003

      In Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, the House of Lords holds that in cases where a complainant alleges direct sex discrimination, the statutory comparison requires that all the circumstances that are relevant to the way the complainant was treated are the same as, or not materially different from, the circumstances of the comparator.

    • Guidance on proving discrimination

      Date:
      1 May 2003

      In Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (27 February 2003), the House of Lords holds that an employee is subjected to a "detriment" for the purposes of discrimination law if a reasonable employee might feel they have been placed at a disadvantage with regard to the circumstances in which they work.

This week's case roundup from Eversheds, covering sex discrimination and ballots for strike action.

Is a like-for-like job comparison enough to establish discrimination?

Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (Northern Ireland), House of Lords [2003] All ER (D) 410

Shamoon was a chief inspector in the Urban Traffic Division of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC).