header-logo header-logo

21 March 2014
Issue: 7600 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

No maternity rights for surrogacy (yet)

CJEU rules on conflicting opinions by Advocates General

A mother who has had a baby through a surrogate is not entitled under EU law to maternity leave or its equivalent, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) has held.

Within an hour of the birth, the mother was caring for and breastfeeding the baby. A parental order was granted, but she was denied maternity leave by her employer.

The unequivocal ruling, in CD v ST (Case C 167/12), clears up confusion caused by two conflicting opinions given by Advocates General. 

Last year, Advocate General Kokott advised that the mother was entitled to 14 weeks’ paid maternity leave under the Pregnant Workers’ Directive, but that the maternity leave should be shared with the woman who gave birth.

On the same day, in a separate case, Advocate General Wahl advised that the 14 weeks maternity leave is intended to protect a woman’s biological condition after giving birth, in Z v A Government Department and the Board of Management of a Community School (Case C 363/12).

Naeema Choudry, partner at Eversheds, says: “The issue of maternity rights for surrogate parents caused confusion last year when two Advocates General gave conflicting opinions on the same day, highlighting the complexity of EU discrimination law in this area.

“That confusion has been dispelled by a final ruling from the CJEU, though the case carries less significance for UK employers now, as the Children and Families Act 2014 will extend the right to paid leave to people who become parents through surrogacy. Although the approach may appear, on its face, not to advance the rights of mothers through surrogacy, it could be seen as refusing to perpetuate a traditional distribution of the roles of men and women.

“This approach seems to be in line with other recent CJEU decisions, in particular the decision in the case of Roca Alvarez (C-104/09), which appeared to recognise that confining certain rights to mothers may, in practice, disadvantage both men and women.”

The CJEU also dismissed the argument that an inability to have a child amounts to a “disability” under EU discrimination legislation.

From April 2015, intended surrogate parents will qualify for adoption leave, under the 2014 Act.

Issue: 7600 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll