Case round up: Noah v Sarah Desrosiers, Highland Council v TGWU, Allen v GMB, Johns v Solent

In Noah v Sarah Desrosiers t/a Wedge, Bushra Noah, a Muslim hairdresser, succeeded in her claim that she had been indirectly discriminated against on grounds of religion as a result of her employer’s requirement that she remove her headscarf while at work. The tribunal found that the requirement for hairdressers to have their own hair visible was not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

The case of Highland Council v TGWU serves as a reminder that, for the purposes of the statutory grievance procedure, collective grievances must concern action directed at particular employees rather than a group of employees seeking to achieve a collective goal.

In Allen v GMB the Court of Appeal held that, while the GMB was trying to balance the interests of all of its members (who had conflicting interests) when negotiating a settlement of the claimants’ equal pay claims, its tactics in persuading the claimants to accept the settlement offered were not a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The claimants had, therefore, suffered indirect discrimination.

The Court of Appeal, in Johns v Solent, has confirmed that all cases which argue that the default retirement case is incompatible with the Equal Treatment Framework Directive should be stayed pending the outcome of the Heyday challenge.

Comments are closed.