In (1) Dixon v Rees and (2) Hopkins v Shepherd & Partners (30 July 1993) EOR52C, the EAT rules that a comparison with how a man would be treated is necessary in pregnancy discrimination cases unless the case is one of dismissal for pregnancy "without more".
In (1) Dixon v Rees and (2) Hopkins v Shepherd & Partners the EAT has construed the House of Lords' decision in Webb v EMO Air Cargo as approving the test set out by the Court of Appeal requiring a comparison between the treatment of a pregnant woman and that of a man who also needed to be absent from work.
The materials and information included in the XpertHR service are provided for reference purposes only. They are not intended either as a substitute for professional advice or judgment or to provide legal or other advice with respect to particular circumstances. Use of the service is subject to our terms and conditions.
Reed Business Information Limited trading as XpertHR is an Appointed Representative of Abbey Protection Group Limited which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority.