Plaintiff was arguing that legislation in the UK was incompatible with directly effective EC directives that prohibited indirect gender discrimination.
HL found for Plaintiff, saying that it had “sufficient interest”.
The commission, under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 had a statutory duty to work towards the elimination of discrimination, giving it locus. NB the other plaintiff here was an individual worker, Mrs. Day.
HL refused her standing because she already had a private law claim against her employers at industrial tribunal, which she had already made, she could not also seek JR. See Cane’s criticism
The determination of this issue turns essentially upon a consideration of the statutory duties and public law role of the E.O.C.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedThese product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
Labour Law | Labour Discrimination Notes (64 pages) |
Labour Law | Sources And Scope Of Labour Law Notes (17 pages) |