Webb v EMO Air Cargo (UK) Ltd (No 2)
The House of Lords interpreted the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 in line with a ruling of the Court of Justice, so as to hold that dismissal for pregnancy was discrimination.
Facts
Ms Webb was employed by EMO Air Cargo to replace another employee who was going on maternity leave. Shortly after starting work, she discovered that she was also pregnant, and she was dismissed. She claimed sex discrimination under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. The House of Lords initially held that she had not been discriminated against, comparing her with a man who would have been unavailable for work at the relevant time, but referred questions to the Court of Justice, which held that dismissal on grounds of pregnancy was contrary to the Equal Treatment Directive.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held that Ms Webb had been discriminated against. Lord Keith said that the 1975 Act could be interpreted in line with the ruling of the Court of Justice, so that, in the case of a woman employed on an indefinite contract, the relevant circumstances that must be the same for a man and a woman did not include the fact that the woman would be unavailable for work because of pregnancy. The case shows the English courts applying the duty of consistent interpretation.
Related cases on indirect effect and state liability
- Adeneler v Ellinikos Organismos Galaktos (ELOG) Case C-212/04, [2006] ECR I-6057
- Brasserie du Pêcheur SA v Germany; R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex p Factortame Ltd (No 3) Joined Cases C-46/93 and C-48/93, [1996] ECR I-1029
- Dillenkofer v Germany Joined Cases C-178/94, C-179/94 and C-188/94 to C-190/94, [1996] ECR I-4845
- Duke v GEC Reliance Ltd [1988] AC 618
- Francovich and Bonifaci v Italy Joined Cases C-6/90 and C-9/90, [1991] ECR I-5357
- Köbler v Austria Case C-224/01, [2003] ECR I-10239
- Litster v Forth Dry Dock & Engineering Co Ltd [1990] 1 AC 546
- Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentación SA Case C-106/89, [1990] ECR I-4135
Studying EU Law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
