Case round up in brief

first_imgCase round up in briefOn 1 Dec 2002 in Personnel Today Previous Article Next Article Comments are closed. This month’s case round up in briefPregnancy-related dismissals The applicant was dismissed because of her poor sickness record. Herabsences included a small amount of pregnancy-related absence. The EAToverturned a finding of sex discrimination on the grounds that thepregnancy-related absence was not the reason for the dismissal. There was noevidence to suggest that the decision would have been any different if thepregnancy related absence had not been taken into account. (Nottingham CityCouncil v Redmond, EAT) “Normal day-to-day activities” do not include sports An inability to cycle, keep goal and play snooker was not sufficient todemonstrate a substantial adverse impact on normal day-to-day activities underthe DDA. The tribunal had wrongly considered what were normal day-to-dayactivities for a person of the applicant’s age and gender. Sports, hobbies andgames are not to be treated as normal day-to-day activities for the purposes ofthe Act. (Coca-Cola Enterprises v Shergill, EAT) Related posts:No related photos.last_img read more