Dineley, Rachel
November 2007
People Management;11/15/2007, Vol. 13 Issue 23, p19
The article focuses on the implication of the decision of an employment tribunal in the case of Bloxham v. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer for employers in Great Britain. The decision has cast light on the questions whether employers' employment practices are discriminatory and whether they can be objectively justified. The tribunal concluded Bloxham had suffered less favourable treatment on the grounds of his age, which was directly discriminatory unless it could be objectively justified.


Related Articles

  • Summary judgment motions in discrimination litigations: A useful tool or a waste of good trees? Macklin, James E. // Army Lawyer;Nov95, Issue 276, p12 

    Discusses how summary judgments can spell success for employment discrimination litigations. Summary judgment standard; Issue of material fact; Shifting burdens of proof; Application of summary judgment standards; Plaintiff's initial burden; Plaintiff's ultimate burden.

  • Michigan Supreme Court Levels the Field for "Reverse Discrimination" Claims. Bulmer, Peter R.; McCarthy, Brian D. // Venulex Legal Summaries;2004 Q3, p1 

    The article discusses the position held by the Michigan Supreme Court on the legal case Lind v. City of Battle Creek. The court states that the background circumstances test to determine the sufficiency of a claim of reverse employment discrimination does not comport with the state's fair...

  • Industrial Relations Act (IV of 2008).  // Eastern Worker;Jan2012, Vol. 52 Issue 1, p6 

    The article discusses a court case in Pakistan on the grievance petition of a worker who was ordered by the Labour Court to be reinstated in service with full back benefits. An appeal was filed by the employer against the decision, since the worker had himself admitted in his cross-examination...

  • Single suggestive remark not actionable: Court. Hofmann, Mark A. // Business Insurance;04/30/2001, Vol. 35 Issue 18, p4 

    Presents the decision of the United States Supreme Court on the case of Clark County School District versus Shirley A. Breeden. Context and history of the case; Reason for the decision; Contention of Breeden on the job requirements.

  • The Individual vs. The Employer: Who Should Be Held Liable Under Employment Discrimination Law? Lees, Tammi J. // Case Western Reserve Law Review;Spring2004, Vol. 54 Issue 3, p861 

    Reports on the decision on the lawsuit filed by Tomka against Seiler Corp. in the Second Federal Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals. Focus of the case on the issue of individual liability in employment discrimination law; Merits of the case; Detection of a conflicting decisions under state and...

  • Validity of Clause.  // Dispute Resolution Journal;Aug99, Vol. 54 Issue 3, p90 

    The article informs that joining of the majority of courts, the Michigan Court of Appeals held on April 9 that employers may require employees to arbitrate statutory employment claims, provided that the procedure is fair and does not waive any substantive rights. Moreover, the agreement to...

  • ALL CHANGE. Aikin, Olga // People Management;6/3/2004, Vol. 10 Issue 11, p21 

    Focuses on the decision of the House of Lords on the case, A versus Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police which focus on transsexual discrimination in employment. Significance of the decision to the creation of the gender recognition bill; Details of the case; Annotations of the court on its...

  • Ladele v London Borough of Islington.  // Employers Law;Sep2008, p8 

    The article presents the case Ladele v London Borough of Islington Employment Tribunal, which addresses the issue of balancing the rights of differing minority groups within the workplace. The claimant, a Christian registrar, was directly and indirectly discriminated against on the grounds of...

  • EMPLOYMENT & LABOR LAW. Tanick, Marshall H. // Bench & Bar of Minnesota;Oct2011, Vol. 68 Issue 9, p37 

    The article focuses on various court cases related to employment and labor in Minnesota. In the case EEOC v. Minn. Dept. of Corrections, it was held by the appellate court "arbitrary age discrimination" without meeting the "safe harbor" requirement is constituted by a reduction in benefits based...


Read the Article


Sign out of this library

Other Topics