- No direct sex discrimination where non-payment of allowance was due to ‘absence’ not ‘maternity absence’ (Commissioner of City of London Police v Geldart)
- What are the practical implications of this decision?
- What is the relevant background?
- Relevant law
- Background facts
- Decision of the employment tribunal
- Decision of the EAT
- What did the Court of Appeal decide?
- Case details
Employment analysis: A failure to pay an allowance due to a mistaken belief that the allowance constituted ‘pay’ and was therefore not payable during the latter part of a police constable’s maternity leave, did not amount to direct sex discrimination. It was the claimant’s unavailability for work that was the reason for non-payment and the fact that her absence would not have occurred ‘but for’ her maternity leave was not determinative of the issue, according to the Court of Appeal.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial