Dixon v Rees [1993] UKEAT 660_91_1907 (19 July 1993)

The correct legal test under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 requires comparison with a hypothetical man who would also be unavailable at the material time; dismissal for pregnancy is not automatically direct discrimination unless a man in comparable circumstances would have been treated more favourably. Both Industrial Tribunals applied the correct legal test and found no direct discrimination as the dismissals were for business convenience or genuine health and safety concerns, not solely because of pregnancy.

Citation: [1993] UKEAT 660
Parties: Appellant: Mrs M Dixon; Respondent: Mr D Rees; Appellant: Miss D Hopkins; Respondent: Shepherd & Partners
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 19 July 1993
Procedural Posture: Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Appeals / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal Decisions
Outcome: Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics: Sex Discrimination, Pregnancy Discrimination, Direct Discrimination, Comparative Analysis Under Sex Discrimination Act 1975

Employment Law Equality Law Sex Discrimination Pregnancy Discrimination Direct Discrimination Comparative Analysis Under Sex Discrimination Act 1975

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mrs M Dixon

Appellant

Mr D Rees

Respondent

Miss D Hopkins

Appellant

Shepherd & Partners

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal (eat) Appeals / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal Decisions

Legal Issues

1 Whether dismissal of a pregnant woman constitutes direct sex discrimination under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975
2 Whether the 'sick man' comparison is valid in pregnancy dismissal cases
3 Whether the Industrial Tribunals applied the correct legal test in dismissing the complaints

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed