Case round up in brief

This month’s case round up in brief

Pregnancy-related dismissals

The applicant was dismissed because of her poor sickness record. Her
absences included a small amount of pregnancy-related absence. The EAT
overturned a finding of sex discrimination on the grounds that the
pregnancy-related absence was not the reason for the dismissal. There was no
evidence to suggest that the decision would have been any different if the
pregnancy related absence had not been taken into account. (Nottingham City
Council v Redmond, EAT)

"Normal day-to-day activities" do not include sports

An inability to cycle, keep goal and play snooker was not sufficient to
demonstrate a substantial adverse impact on normal day-to-day activities under
the DDA. The tribunal had wrongly considered what were normal day-to-day
activities for a person of the applicant’s age and gender. Sports, hobbies and
games are not to be treated as normal day-to-day activities for the purposes of
the Act. (Coca-Cola Enterprises v Shergill, EAT)

Comments are closed.