EU employment measures

New and updated

  • Enderby has no effect on SDA construction

    Date:
    1 May 1994
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Bhudi and others v IMI Refiners Ltd (15 February 1994) EOR55A, the EAT rules that despite the decision of the European Court of Justice in the Enderby case, there is no obligation on a UK court to construe s.1(1)(b) of the Sex Discrimination Act in such a way as to disregard the express provision relating to proof of a "requirement or condition".

  • Small business exclusion permitted

    Date:
    1 May 1994
    Type:
    Law reports

    German unfair dismissal law, which excludes employees of small businesses from the right to complain, does not contravene EC equality law, the European Court rules in Kirshammer-Hack v Sidal (30 November 1993) EOR55B.

  • Carry on discriminating

    Date:
    1 March 1994
    Type:
    Law reports

    Pension providers and insurers are free to continue to use sex-discriminatory actuarial tables, according to the European Court of Justice's ruling in Neath v Hugh Steeper Ltd (22 December 1993) EOR54B, at least in so far as calculating lump sums and transfer values under final salary occupational pension schemes are concerned.

  • Different bridging pensions lawful

    Date:
    1 January 1994
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Roberts v Birds Eye Walls Ltd (9 November 1993) EOR53A, the European Court of Justice rules that occupational bridging pensions which pay less to women than to men between age 60 to 65 do not contravene European Community equality law.

  • Retrospection issue settled

    Date:
    1 January 1994
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Ten Oever v Stichting Bedrijfspensioenfonds voor het Glazenwassers- en Schoonmaakbedrijf (6 October 1993) EOR53B the European Court of Justice rules that equal pension benefits are required only in relation to benefits payable in respect of periods of employment subsequent to 17 May 1990, the date of the decision of the European Court of Justice in Barber v Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group EOR32A.

  • Defences narrowed

    Date:
    1 November 1993
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority and Secretary of State for Health (27 October 1993) EOR52A, the European Court of Justice rules that it is not sufficient for an employer to show that significant pay differences between female-dominated jobs and male-dominated jobs arose for non-discriminatory reasons.

  • No remedy against private sector employer

    Date:
    1 November 1993
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Porter v Cannon Hygiene Ltd (10 March 1993) EOR52F, the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland holds that the Sex Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order cannot not be construed so as to uphold a discriminatory retirement complaint by a private sector employee who was dismissed prior to the removal of the statutory exclusion preventing such complaints from being brought.

  • Compensation limit unlawful

    Date:
    1 September 1993
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Marshall v Southampton and South-West Hampshire Area Health Authority (No.2) (2 August 1993) EOR51A, the European Court of Justice rules that it is contrary to European Community law for a fixed upper limit to be placed on the compensation which can be awarded for the loss and damage suffered as a result of sex discrimination.

  • Doubt cast on service payments

    Date:
    1 July 1991
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Nimz v Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg (7 February 1991) EOR38A, the European Court of Justice holds that where using service as a pay criterion has a disparate impact upon women, the employer must justify it by showing a relationship between the nature of the work performed and the experience gained by performing the work.

  • When Directives are directly effective

    Date:
    1 July 1991
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Foster and others v British Gas plc (18 April 1991) EOR38B, the House of Lords rejects a "narrow or strained construction" of the test set out by the European Court of Justice for determining whether a particular employer is an organisation whose employees are entitled to rely upon the provisions of a Community Directive which has direct effect.

About this topic

HR and legal information and guidance relating to EU employment measures.