"Until 1993, any woman, whether employed by the State, such as the seven applicants, or otherwise, who was dismissed by reason of pregnancy would have been entitled to an award under the Act or the Directive which was limited to£11,000 . Thus, if the applicants' claims for unlawful discrimination had been brought in the 1980s, say, they would have recovered no more than the statutory maximum in force at that time and the Industrial Tribunal would have had no power to award interest. It follows, therefore, that if Parliament had not exempted employment in the armed services from the Act, none of the complainants in this case would have recovered more than a few thousand pounds. Thus, the uncertain legal position has, in one sense, worked in the applicants' favour. Further, the law has developed, so that awards for injury to feelings have increased as the courts have become more mindful of the humiliation, anger and distress that sex discrimination can cause. Again, because they are bringing claims to which there is no time limit (the Government having failed to implement the provisions of the Directive in full) the applicants are getting a benefit from the delay. The same applies to the awards of interest which only became payable, under domestic law, from November 1993."
"In laying down guidelines it will become clear that we are taking a different view as to the proper approach to compensation from that taken by some Industrial Tribunals. Yet, because the MoD have chosen not to complain about the Tribunal's general approach, save on the limited specific grounds which is argued before us, there will be an inconsistency between the actual disposal fo these appeals and the results which would have been obtained had our guidelines been applied to the seven cases. Further, because of the way the matter has been argued, large awards which we feel to be wholly unjustified, will remain undisturbed, although we would hope that, for the future, Industrial Tribunals will be wise enough to ignore them when assessing compensation."
"1. Industrial Tribunals were faced with difficult problems; these are some of the first cases with which they have had to deal where their jurisdiction to award compensation is unlimited. It appears to us that they have conscientiously attempted to assess compensation in the light of the arguments presented to them. To an extent, the parties have also been "feeling their way". It is our view that, often through no fault of their own, some Tribunals have been induced to make what we regard as manifestly excessive awards of compensation. That is because we do not consider that either the MoD or the applicants have put before the Industrial Tribunals what we believe to be the correct approach to the assessment of compensation."
"On the evidence we find on the balance of probabilities that Mrs Pitt would have remained in the Army up to the completion of 12 years' service, that is to July 1995."