Indirect discrimination

New and updated

  • Case digest: pregnancy discrimination

    Date:
    1 January 2007
    Type:
    Law reports

    Tina McKevitt, lecturer in employment law at University of Sheffield, provides a round-up of employment tribunal decisions on discrimination.

  • Allen v GMB

    Date:
    14 June 2006
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Allen v GMB [2006] ET/2506025/05, the employment tribunal has held that the GMB was liable for sex discrimination and victimisation in failing to pursue Middlesbrough Borough Council in connection with a long-running equal pay dispute.

  • Sex discrimination: Minimum 75% full-time hours policy is indirectly discriminatory

    Date:
    14 October 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    In British Airways plc v Starmer, the EAT holds that the tribunal was entitled to find that a decision by the employer not to allow the employee to work part-time at 50% of her full-time hours, but only at 75%, was a "provision, criterion or practice" for the purposes of s.1(2)(b) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.

  • Sex discrimination: Discriminatory benefit rule not justified

    Date:
    12 August 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Hockenjos v Secretary of State for Social Security, the Court of Appeal holds that the secretary of state had failed objectively to justify a rule for entitlement to a supplement to income-based jobseeker's allowance where the recipient is the parent responsible for a child, which was linked to receipt of child benefit.

  • Equal treatment: Exclusion of female cleaners from permanent posts discriminatory

    Date:
    29 July 2005
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Nikoloudi v Organismos Tilepikinonion Ellados AE, the European Court of Justice holds that, while creating categories of workers composed of persons of a single sex does not itself constitute direct discrimination, less unfavourable treatment by reference to that category will amount to direct discrimination.

  • Sex discrimination: No error of law in tribunal's approach to justifiability of discriminatory condition

    Date:
    19 September 2003
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Sibley v The Girls' Public Day School Trust and Norwich High School for Girls, the EAT holds that an employment tribunal adopted the right approach in considering whether a potentially discriminatory condition that a school form tutor must be in a full-time teaching post was objectively justified.

  • Unfair dismissal/ redundancy: Upper age limits for unfair dismissal and redundancy ruled unlawful

    Date:
    7 March 2003
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Rutherford v Towncircle Ltd (t/a Harvest) (in liquidation) and Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and Bentley v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, an employment tribunal holds that the exclusion of employees aged over 65 from the right to bring a claim for unfair dismissal compensation, or from entitlement to a redundancy payment upon dismissal, is contrary to European law.

  • Tribunal strikes down age limit

    Date:
    1 November 2002
    Type:
    Law reports

    In Rutherford v Towncircle Ltd and Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (No.2) and Bentley v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (22 August 2002), an employment tribunal has ruled that the statutory upper age limit of 65 on the right to claim unfair dismissal and the right to a redundancy payment is indirectly discriminatory against men and contrary to EU law.

  • Older and wiser and not ready for the scrapheap

    Date:
    8 October 2002
    Type:
    Law reports

    A recent employment tribunal decision could herald the end of the traditional retirement age as we know it.

  • Government appeals age bias ruling

    Date:
    1 October 2002
    Type:
    Law reports

    The Employers Forum on Age (EFA) is unhappy that the Government is to appeal against a landmark employment tribunal ruling on older workers.

About this topic

HR and legal information and guidance relating to indirect sex discrimination.