header-logo header-logo

21 March 2014
Issue: 7600 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

No maternity rights for surrogacy (yet)

CJEU rules on conflicting opinions by Advocates General

A mother who has had a baby through a surrogate is not entitled under EU law to maternity leave or its equivalent, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) has held.

Within an hour of the birth, the mother was caring for and breastfeeding the baby. A parental order was granted, but she was denied maternity leave by her employer.

The unequivocal ruling, in CD v ST (Case C 167/12), clears up confusion caused by two conflicting opinions given by Advocates General. 

Last year, Advocate General Kokott advised that the mother was entitled to 14 weeks’ paid maternity leave under the Pregnant Workers’ Directive, but that the maternity leave should be shared with the woman who gave birth.

On the same day, in a separate case, Advocate General Wahl advised that the 14 weeks maternity leave is intended to protect a woman’s biological condition after giving birth, in Z v A Government Department and the Board of Management of a Community School (Case C 363/12).

Naeema Choudry, partner at Eversheds, says: “The issue of maternity rights for surrogate parents caused confusion last year when two Advocates General gave conflicting opinions on the same day, highlighting the complexity of EU discrimination law in this area.

“That confusion has been dispelled by a final ruling from the CJEU, though the case carries less significance for UK employers now, as the Children and Families Act 2014 will extend the right to paid leave to people who become parents through surrogacy. Although the approach may appear, on its face, not to advance the rights of mothers through surrogacy, it could be seen as refusing to perpetuate a traditional distribution of the roles of men and women.

“This approach seems to be in line with other recent CJEU decisions, in particular the decision in the case of Roca Alvarez (C-104/09), which appeared to recognise that confining certain rights to mothers may, in practice, disadvantage both men and women.”

The CJEU also dismissed the argument that an inability to have a child amounts to a “disability” under EU discrimination legislation.

From April 2015, intended surrogate parents will qualify for adoption leave, under the 2014 Act.

Issue: 7600 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Commercial and technology team in Cambridge strengthened by partner hire

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Andrew & Andrew Solicitors—Shikha Datta

Hampshire firm appoints head of new family department

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Latham & Watkins—Sarah Lightdale

Firm strengthens securities practice with partner return

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll