Removal of police dog from pregnant handler was direct discrimination
In the case of Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Keohane [UKEAT/0463/12/RN], the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) held that the removal of a police dog from its pregnant handler during her maternity leave constituted direct discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy and maternity.
The employee in question was a police dog handler, in charge of two search dogs. In October 2010, she informed her employer that she was pregnant — as a result, she was taken off operational duties for health and safety reasons. The police (in line with their policy of re-allocating or withdrawing police dogs where handlers were likely to be non-operational for a while) subsequently decided to re-allocate the employee’s ‘passive’ search dog, Nunki Pippin. In October 2011, the police decided not to return Nunki Pippin to the employee…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Kemp Little briefing.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.
News from Kemp Little
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Kemp Little
M&A Diligence: time-limited obligation to resolve a dispute by friendly discussions found to be enforceable
Care should be taken when inserting clauses into acquisition agreements that require parties to speak to each other to resolve problems.
A truncated due diligence exercise, however time-efficient, can lead to unexpected exposure for purchasers.