Equality, diversity and human rights
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.
Sally Logan, associate at Addleshaw Goddard, brings you a comprehensive update on the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and provides advice on what to do about them.
Judith Harris of Addleshaw Goddard brings you a comprehensive update on the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and provides advice on what to do about them.
In Council of the City of Newcastle upon Tyne v Allan and others, Degnan and others v Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, the EAT holds that there can be no claim for non-economic loss, that is for injury to feelings or for exemplary or aggravated damages, in claims under the Equal Pay Act 1970 because these are claims in contract rather than statutory torts, as in claims under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.
In Williams v J Walter Thompson Group Ltd, the Court of Appeal holds that an employment tribunal was correct to decide that a blind employee suffered unlawful disability discrimination and constructive unfair dismissal when her employer failed to provide her with the specialist equipment and training necessary for her to carry out the IT work for which she was appointed.
In Majrowski v Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Trust, the Court of Appeal holds that vicarious liability is not restricted to common law claims. An employer may be vicariously liable for a breach of statutory duty imposed only on his employee, if that would be just and reasonable in light of a sufficiently close connection between the unlawful act and the employee's duties and/or if the risk of the employee's wrongdoing is "reasonably incidental" to the employee's duties and, further, if the statute does not expressly (or on its proper construction) exclude such vicarious liability.
Karen Smith and Sophy Robinson of Addleshaw Goddard bring you a comprehensive update on the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and provide advice on what to do about them.
In a hearing of three conjoined appeals (Igen Ltd (formerly Leeds Careers Guidance) and others v Wong; Chamberlin Solicitors and another v Emokpae; Brunel University v Webster, 18 February 2005), the Court of Appeal considers the guidelines established in Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd (EOR 118) and sets out revised guidance on the burden of proof provisions in the discrimination legislation.
In Igen Ltd & ors v Wong; Chamberlin Solicitors & ors v Emokpae; Brunel University v Webster, the Court of Appeal holds that the amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and Race Relations Act 1976, in order to implement the Burden of Proof Directive (97/80/EC), require a two-stage process to determine direct discrimination.
This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering Sunday working amounting to religious discrimination.
Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to equality, diversity and human rights.