header-logo header-logo

29 March 2018 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 7787 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Unfair dismissal: protecting your brood

nlj_7787_pigott

Anomalies persist in the protection of pregnant women against dismissal, as Charles Pigott explains

  • According to current domestic case law, pregnant women continue to enjoy weaker protection while still at work compared to those already on maternity leave.
  • An opportunity to address this anomaly at a EU level was recently passed up by the European Court of Justice.

In Really Easy Car Credit v Thompson UKEAT 0197/17/0301 (unreported) the Employment Appeal Tribunal has confirmed that an employer must have actual knowledge of an employee’s pregnancy for a claim for pregnancy-related automatically unfair dismissal to succeed. It has also reiterated the orthodox position that an employer is not obliged to revisit a decision to dismiss once it becomes of aware of the pregnancy.

Domestic law

Leaving aside the provisions of the Equality Act relating to maternity and sex discrimination, the relevant law applying in Britain can be found in a combination of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA) and the Maternity and Parental Leave etc Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/3312) (MPL).

Under regulation

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll