Updated to include information on Essop and others v Home Office (UK Border Agency), in which the Supreme Court dealt with disadvantage in the context of indirect discrimination claims.
Updated to include information on the gender pay gap reporting requirement, in force from 6 April 2017 for private- and voluntary-sector organisations, and 31 March 2017 for public-sector organisations.
In Lommers v Minister van Landbouw, Natuurbeheer en Visserij (19 March 2002), the European Court of Justice upholds a policy in a Dutch civil service department which offers subsidised childcare places only to female employees. The ECJ says that the scheme does not contravene EU law so long as it is also available on the same conditions to men who are single parents.
In Abrahamsson and Anderson v Fogelqvist the European Court of Justice rules that provisions of Swedish legislation intended to address the underrepresentation of women in university appointments were precluded by EC equal treatment legislation.
On an application by Georg Badeck and others, the European Court of Justice rules that provisions of German legislation - the aim of which was equal access of women and men to posts in the public service by the adoption of advancement plans for women with binding targets - were not precluded by the EC Equal Treatment Directive.
In Kalanke v Freie Hansestadt Bremen (17 October 1995) EOR65A, the European Court of Justice rules that a German law giving equally qualified women preference against men in selection for public sector jobs in which women were underrepresented did not fall within the exception to the principle of nondiscrimination permitted by Article 2(4) of the Equal Treatment Directive.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to sex discrimination (positive action).