Bain v Bowles and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 April 1991 |
| Date | 19 April 1991 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Dillon, Lord Justice Mann and Lord Justice Beldam
Sex discrimination - advertisement - refusal to publish
In refusing, pursuant to a long-established policy, to publish an advertisement by a man resident in Italy for a cook and housekeeper to work at his residence, the publishers of a magazine were guilty of unlawful sexual discrimination contrary to the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.
The Court of Appeal so held in allowing an appeal by the plaintiff, Mr N M Bain, from the dismissal by Judge Harris, QC, on June 4, 1990 in Westminster County Court of the plaintiff's claim against the defendants, Mrs M M Bowles, Mr T G A Bowles and Ms J M Budworth, proprietors of The Lady, and The Lady (a Firm), for, inter alia, a declaration in respect of an alleged breach of the 1975 Act.
Mr Anthony Scrivener, QC and Mr Michael Lazarus for the plaintiff; Mr Frederic Reynold, QC and Mr Harry Trusted for the defendants.
LORD JUSTICE DILLON said that the plaintiff asked the defendants to publish the following advertisement: "Tuscany...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Naeem v The Secretary of State for Justice
...compared with like (cf. the observation to the same effect by Dillon LJ about the predecessor provision in the 1975 Act in Bain v Bowles [1991] IRLR 356, at para. 16 (p. 358)). But I do not, with respect, think that section 23 affords the best route to the right result. It tends to bring in......
-
Smith v Gardner Merchant Ltd
...would be wholly inconsistent with the ruling of the House of Lords in James v Eastleigh Borough Council:" per Dillon L.J. in Bain v Bowles [1991] IRLR 356, 358. (2) As the language of Section 1(1)(a) makes clear, the comparison can be made with the way the employer has in fact treated a wom......
-
Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary
...material respects the same. This self-evident proposition is spelled out in section 5(3) of the Sex Discrimination Act: see Dillon LJ in Bain v Bowles [1991] IRLR 356, 357. As originally enacted (the later amendments are not relevant for present purposes), section 5(3) provides: "A compari......
-
European Roma Rights v Immigration Officer
...authorities principally relied upon by the appellants under this head are R -v—CRE (ex parte Westminster City Council) [1985] ICR 827, Bain -v—Bowles [1991] IRLR 357 and James -v—Eastleigh Borough Council [1992] AC 73 In the CRE case the council had dismissed a black road sweeper to whose a......