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

Sex discrimination: Part-timer entitled to disapply qualifying hours thresholds

This report relates to 1 case(s)

  • expand

    Jesuthasan v London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham [1998] IRLR 372 CA (1 other report)

    • Male part-timer can rely on EOC case

      Date:
      1 June 1998

      In London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham v Jesuthasan the Court of Appeal has ruled that a male part-time worker employed in the public sector was entitled to rely on the 1994 decision of the House of Lords in ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission to claim a redundancy payment and compensation for unfair dismissal in respect of a dismissal occurring before the minimum hours per week qualifications were removed by the Employment Protection (Part-Time Employees) Regulations 1995.

In London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham v Jesuthasan 26.2.98 Court of Appeal, the Court of Appeal holds that a man who worked in the public sector for fewer than 16 hours a week was entitled to claim a redundancy payment and compensation for unfair dismissal in respect of a dismissal occurring before the statutory hours thresholds barring such claims were repealed in 1995. He could rely on the declarations granted by the House of Lords in the EOC case that those thresholds in respect of employees generally were incompatible with Community law and fell to be disapplied in respect of all employees, regardless of their sex.