header-logo header-logo

Who cares wins?

11 September 2008 / Juliet Carp
Issue: 7336 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Does Coleman offer carers a free standing right to flexible working arrangements asks Juliet Carp?

Sharon Coleman was a legal secretary working at Attridge Law. Her son suffers from medical conditions requiring special care. Coleman alleges that after her return to work from maternity leave she suffered discrimination because of her son's disability. She claims she was offered less flexible working arrangements than other parents who worked with her and that she was subject to abusive comments related to her son's disability. She accepted voluntary redundancy and later claimed she suffered discrimination contrary to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA 1995).
Language problems

The problem for Coleman is that the language of DDA 1995 does not appear to cover discrimination on grounds of someone else's disability. DDA 1995 is the means through which the disability-related aspects of the EC Equal Treatment Framework Directive 2000/78/EC (Framework Directive), are implemented in the UK. So, before making any decisions on the facts, the employment tribunal asked the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for clarification of the scope of the

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll