Just to follow this up, I want to deal with a criticism of the SC judgment I’ve seen a few times, which is that it “raises more questions than it answers”, and in particular that it sets out “no legal mechanism for proving sex”.
In a civil case the Civil Procedure Rules tell you:
- the claimant pleads (ie states) the facts they want to rely on (CPR r16.4(1)(a)).
- the opposing party then MUST go through each fact, and either admit it; deny it (saying why); or say it can’t do either. (2/9)
Apr 22 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
A week after the Supreme Court's decision in For Women Scotland, I've done a short article with four lessons for employers (link in the last tweet).
I haven't tried to be comprehensive (go to @akuareindorf and @michaelpforan for that), but to highlight some practicalities. (1/6)
Lesson 1: single sex spaces in workplaces (toilets, washing facilities, changing rooms) really do have to be single sex. The Workplace Regulations require it, and they're not, they lose anti-discrimination protection under the Equality Act (2/6).
Feb 22, 2021 • 57 tweets • 51 min read
I'm really excited for this Supreme Court Uber webinar with Laura Robinson and @timothygoodwin later, and there is still time to sign up.
If you can't make it, I'll be attending and tweeting out the highlights from 4pm. #ukemplaw#uber#legalwebinar
And we're starting. @timothygoodwin says this case sends "tremors, not ripples" through employment law; and that it raises questions about whether Uber's business model is sustainable. #uberdecision#ukemplaw#legalwebinar
