Employment law cases

All items: Equality, diversity and human rights

  • Training recommendation

    Date:
    1 June 1994

    A recommendation that staff who come into contact with job applicants be trained in the provisions of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and that all those handling job applications and conducting interviews be trained in the avoidance of unlawful discrimination has been made by a Middlesborough industrial tribunal (Chair: J D Myers) in Dickinson and Field v Mason and Mason.

  • PRP scheme lacked transparency

    Date:
    1 June 1994

    An assessment process for performance-related pay purposes, which led to a woman being paid £780 a year less than men on like work, suffered from confusion, double counting and an absence of transparency, rules a Norwich industrial tribunal (Chair: D R Crome) in Latham v Eastern Counties Newspapers Ltd.

  • Expert's report rejected

    Date:
    1 June 1994

    In Thompson v John Blackburn Ltd a Leeds industrial tribunal (Chair: J Prophet) refuses to admit an independent expert's report in equal value proceedings because in its view the expert failed to make clear findings of fact and take proper account of all information represented to her.

  • Sex discrimination: Dismissal for wearing trousers was discriminatory

    Date:
    1 March 1994

    In Stoke-on-Trent Community Transport v Cresswell the EAT upholds an industrial tribunal's decision that the dismissal of a woman for wearing trousers at work amounted to sex discrimination, because male employees were not subject to any rules or disciplinary sanctions in respect of their appearance.

  • Sex discrimination: Cap requirement not discriminatory

    Date:
    1 January 1994

    In Burrett v West Birmingham Health Authority the EAT upholds an industrial tribunal's decision that a female nurse, disciplined for refusing to wear a starched linen cap which male nurses did not have to wear, was not treated less favourably on grounds of sex.

  • Defences narrowed

    Date:
    1 November 1993

    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.

  • Compensation limit unlawful

    Date:
    1 September 1993

    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.

  • Discrimination: Compensation cannot include exemplary damages

    Date:
    1 July 1993

    An industrial tribunal has no power to award exemplary damages in a discrimination case, holds the EAT in Deane v London Borough of Ealing and another, following the ruling of the Court of Appeal in Gibbons and others v South West Water Services Ltd.

  • Sex discrimination: Identifying the "pool" for comparison

    Date:
    1 April 1993

    In Jones v University of Manchester the Court of Appeal considers for the first time how a tribunal should define the "pool" of people upon which it should base its calculation of whether a requirement imposed by an employer indirectly discriminates against one sex.

  • Wetstein v (1) Misprestige Management Services Ltd (2) O'Farrell

    Date:
    31 December 1991

    In Wetstein v (1) Misprestige Management Services Ltd (2) O'Farrell EAT/523/91, the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld a tribunal's finding that a requirement to work a full week did not constitute indirect race discrimination against those of the Jewish race.

About this category

Employment law cases: HR and legal information and guidance relating to equality, diversity and human rights.