Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

IRELAND

IRELAND Sex discrimination - adoptive leave - special treatment for women HEADNOTES Facts The claimant was employed as a night telephonist and he and his wife adopted a child in 1991. He applied to his employer, which operated an adop- tive leave scheme, for leave under the scheme but was refused because such leave was only available for female employees. The question whether the employer had discriminated against the claimant, on grounds of his sex, was referred to an equality officer for investigation and recommendation. The equality officer held that the company had not unlawfully discriminated against the claimant but that decision was appealed successfully to the Labour Court. The company appealed to the High Court (see 16 ILLR 132) and then to the Supreme Court. Decision Because the adoptive leave scheme available to the company's employees was confined exclusively to women, a prima facie case of discrimination arose. The company could not rely on the statutory exemption in respect of special treatment for women in connection with "pregnancy or childbirth" as these words could not be interpreted as including adoption. The company's appeal was consequently dismissed. Law Applied Council Directive No. 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 Article 2(1): http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Labour Law Reports Online Brill

IRELAND

Download PDF
18 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/ireland-MVFue87kFC

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
eISSN
2211-6028
DOI
10.1163/221160298X00108
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Sex discrimination - adoptive leave - special treatment for women HEADNOTES Facts The claimant was employed as a night telephonist and he and his wife adopted a child in 1991. He applied to his employer, which operated an adop- tive leave scheme, for leave under the scheme but was refused because such leave was only available for female employees. The question whether the employer had discriminated against the claimant, on grounds of his sex, was referred to an equality officer for investigation and recommendation. The equality officer held that the company had not unlawfully discriminated against the claimant but that decision was appealed successfully to the Labour Court. The company appealed to the High Court (see 16 ILLR 132) and then to the Supreme Court. Decision Because the adoptive leave scheme available to the company's employees was confined exclusively to women, a prima facie case of discrimination arose. The company could not rely on the statutory exemption in respect of special treatment for women in connection with "pregnancy or childbirth" as these words could not be interpreted as including adoption. The company's appeal was consequently dismissed. Law Applied Council Directive No. 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 Article 2(1):

Journal

International Labour Law Reports Online – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 1997

There are no references for this article.