Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sex Discrimination Against Part-Time Workers: The “Biggs” Issues for Women

  • Case Note
  • Published:
Feminist Legal Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. SDA 1975, s.1(1)(a).

  2. SDA 1975, s.1(1)(b).

  3. Case C-96/80 [1981] I.R.L.R. 228.

  4. Case C-170/84[1986] I.R.L.R. 317.

  5. Case C-262/88[1990] I.R.L.R. 240.

  6. [1995] 1A.C 1.

  7. S.I. 1995 no.31.

  8. [1996] I.C.R. 364.

  9. [1997] I.R.L.R. 387.

  10. Case C-246/96[1998] I.R.L.R. 86.

  11. [1995] All E.R. 193.

  12. [1976] E.C.R. 455.

  13. Case C-208/90[1991] I.R.L.R. 387.

  14. Rewe-Zentralfinanz e.G and Rewe-Zentral AG v. Landschwirtschafiskammer für das Saarland Case C-33/76 [1976] E.C.R. 1989.

  15. Rewe is explained in Preston, Court of Appeal judgment at 236 para. 24.

  16. See O. Hyams, “Part-timers and discrimination”, Solicitors’ Journal 142 (1998), 129 & 132.

    Google Scholar 

  17. For example, Cooper v. City of Liverpool Community College EAT/1325/96, and Case No. 31066/94/B and Others in the Ashford Tribunal.

  18. Sees. s111(2)(b) ERA 1996.

  19. [1980] I.R.L.R. 103.

  20. [1993] I.R-LR. 333.

  21. See Case No. 31066/94/B and Others in the Ashford Tribunal.

  22. Nows.111 ERA 1996.

  23. 313At 374, para.B.

  24. See Equal Opportunities Review No.67, 40.

  25. Case C-208/90 [1991] E.C.R. I–4269.

  26. At 377D.

  27. [1995] I.C.R. 722.

  28. 377 para. G.

  29. 76/207/EEC.

  30. Case C-62/93 [1995] All E.R. (EC) 684; [1995] E.C.R. I-1883.

  31. See Coppel, I.L.J. 25 (1996), 153–160.

  32. Fischer v. Voorhuis Hengelo BV Case C-57/93 [1994] E.C.R. I-4541.

  33. Case 43/75 [1976] E.C.R. 455.

  34. At 374, para.B.

  35. Neill L.J. in Biggs at 374, para.D.

  36. Equal Opportunities Review No.67,40.

  37. Magorrian and Cunningham v. Eastern Health and Social Services [1998] I.R.L.R. 96.

  38. See Neill L.J. at 376. para. B.

  39. Para. 52.

  40. In Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange Assurance Group [1990] I.R.L.R. 240, the ECJ placed a limitation on the retrospective impact of their decision by restricting claims for inequality in pensions under Art. 119 to claims made after the date of the judgment, except for those who have before that date initiated legal proceedings or raised an equivalent claim under the applicable national law. See R.W. Painter et al., Cases and Materials on Employment Law (London: Blackstone Press Ltd, 1996, 2nd ed.), 170–171.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Para. 49.

  42. Para. 44.

Download references

Authors
  1. Lesley Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Kent Law Clinic. I would like to thank Catherine Carpenter, John Pritchard. Bernard Ryan and John Fitzpatrick for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baker, L. Sex Discrimination Against Part-Time Workers: The “Biggs” Issues for Women. Feminist Legal Stud 6, 257–271 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03359632

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03359632

Search

Navigation