R ((Seymour Smyth) v Secretary of State for employment


2000. this is about labour law

this is aboyt thw qualifying period of work before someone gets rightrs against arbitrary dismissal

it was held this was unfair to women as they are less likelt to have reached this 2 year period. it is therefore indreictly discriminatory

Miss Seymours SMyyth said the 2 year rule was indirect discrimination aaginst her

This was against TFEU and the Equal Treament Directive

Miss Perez made a similar claim. Bith has been thrown out on their ear ater a year

The ECJ said unfair dismissal compensation payment was not pay

unfair dismissal legislation was within the ambit of EU law

it was found that the 2 year rile was fair and not discriminatory

states must keep under review such laws


About Calers

Born Belfast 1971. I read history at Edinburgh. I did a Master's at UCL. I have semi-libertarian right wing opinions. I am married with a daughter and a son. I am allergic to cats. I am the falling hope of the not so stern and somewhat bending Tories. I am a legal beagle rather than and eagle. Big up the Commonwealth of Nations.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s