The Claimant brought complaints against the Respondent including direct sex discrimination, harassment and maternity leave discrimination. The ET upheld the complaints, finding, amongst other things, that the Respondent had acted on the basis of certain stereotypical assumptions about women and about women taking maternity leave. The Respondent appealed in relation to the maternity leave discrimination decision, and also against the sex discrimination and harassment decision on the basis that (1) there was no evidential or other basis for the supposed stereotypical assumption on which the ET had relied in its findings, and (2) fairness required that, where such a case was being presented on such a basis, the Respondent must be given proper notice of that case and the opportunity to answer it, and no such notice or opportunity had been given.

The EAT held that the appeal in relation to the maternity leave discrimination decision failed, since the ET had applied the correct test of causation; however, the EAT allowed the appeal regarding sex discrimination and harassment, on the basis that it was unfair of the ET to reach its decision without the Respondent, its representatives and witnesses being given the opportunity to challenge the existence of the stereotypical assumptions relied on by the ET. The direct sex discrimination and sex harassment claims would be remitted to a fresh ET.