Equality, diversity and human rights
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
In Dekker v Stichting Vormingscentrum voor Jonge Volwassenen (VJV-Centrum) Plus (8 November 1990), the European Court of Justice, in a historic decision, holds that refusal to employ a woman because she is pregnant or because of the costs associated with employing a pregnant woman is direct discrimination on grounds of sex contrary to the principle of equal treatment embodied in the EEC Equal Treatment Directive.
The European Court of Justice has ruled in Dekker v Stichting Vormingscentrum voor Jong Volwassenen (VJV-Centrum) Plus that it is a breach of the EEC "Equal Treatment" Directive for an employer to refuse to recruit a woman because she is pregnant, even if hiring her would have serious financial consequences for the employer.
In James v Eastleigh Borough Council (14 June 1990) EOR33B, the House of Lords holds that the test for determining whether there has been direct discrimination is "would the complainant have received the same treatment from the defendant but for his or her sex?". It is not necessary for complainants to prove in addition that the subjective reason they were treated less favourably was because of their gender.
In a sex discrimination case the crucial question is whether the complainant would have received the same treatment but for his or her sex.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to equality, diversity and human rights.
Access our main resources on equality, diversity and human rights according to the type of information you need.