Discrimination

08 March 2012

Issue: 7504 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court

Dunn v Institute of Cemetery and Crematorium Management UKEAT/0531/10/DA, [2012] All ER (D) 173 (Feb)

Chief Constable of the Bedfordshire Constabulary v Graham [2002] IRLR 239 was authority for the proposition that a married person was protected by s 3 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 by reason of her being married to her husband. It followed that any person who was married, or in a civil partnership, was protected against discrimination on the ground of that relationship and on the ground of their relationship to the other partner. Any less favourable treatment which was marriage-specific was unlawful.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content

If you are already a subscriber sign in

...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS

Read All

Conveyancers celebrate U-turn over mortgage handbook fee

Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook

Are you suited to a career in prosecution?

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors

LSB marks Mazur homework

Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)

NLJ this week: Stuck in the past?

The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness

NLJ this week: No automatic bar on ‘user damages’

A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law

Error message

Discrimination

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison