The power of people analytics – what’s your opinion? Take our 10 minute survey for a chance to win £500. Take part

Smith v Safeway plc [1996] IRLR 456 CA

Reports relating to this case:

  • Conventional appearance rule not discriminatory

    1 September 1996

    In Smith v Safeway plc (16 February 1996) EOR69A, the Court of Appeal holds that an appearance code which applies a standard of what is conventional applies an even-handed approach between men and women, and not one which is sex discriminatory.

  • Sex discrimination: Men's hair-length restriction not discriminatory

    1 July 1996

    In Smith v Safeway plc, the Court of Appeal holds that an industrial tribunal was entitled to decide that an employer's appearance code which required male employees' hair not to be below collar-length was not discriminatory.