Print Options
PrintThe Whole
Act
PrintThe Whole
Part
PrintThe Whole
Cross Heading
PrintThis
Section
only
Changes over time for: Section 66A
Llinell Amser Newidiadau
This timeline shows the different points in time where a change occurred. The dates will coincide with the earliest date on which the change (e.g an insertion, a repeal or a substitution) that was applied came into force. The first date in the timeline will usually be the earliest date when the provision came into force. In some cases the first date is 01/02/1991 (or for Northern Ireland legislation 01/01/2006). This date is our basedate. No versions before this date are available. For further information see the Editorial Practice Guide and Glossary under Help.
Version Superseded: 06/04/2008
Status:
Point in time view as at 01/04/2006. This version of this provision has been superseded.
Status
You are viewing this legislation item as it stood at a particular point in time. A later version of this or provision, including subsequent changes and effects, supersedes this version.
Note the term provision is used to describe a definable element in a piece of legislation that has legislative effect – such as a Part, Chapter or section.
Changes to legislation:
There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (repealed), Section 66A.
Changes to Legislation
Revised legislation carried on this site may not be fully up to date. At the current time any known changes or effects made by subsequent legislation have been applied to the text of the legislation you are viewing by the editorial team. Please see ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ for details regarding the timescales for which new effects are identified and recorded on this site.
[66A Burden of proof: county and sheriff courtsE+W+S
(1)This section applies to any claim brought under section 66(1) in a county court in England and Wales or a sheriff court in Scotland.
(2)Where, on the hearing of the claim, the claimant proves facts from which the court could, apart from this section, conclude in the absence of an adequate explanation that the respondent—
[(a)has committed an act of discrimination or harassment against the claimant which is unlawful by virtue of any provision of Part 3 so far as it applies to vocational training, or]
(b)is by virtue of section 41 or 42 to be treated as having committed such an act of discrimination [or harassment] against the claimant,
the court shall uphold the claim unless the respondent proves that he did not commit, or, as the case may be, is not to be treated as having committed, that act.]
Yn ôl i’r brig