Bilka-Kaufhaus GmbH v Weber von Hartz (1986) C-170/84 is an EU labour law case, relevant for UK labour law, that sets out the test for objective justification for indirect discrimination.

Facts

Frau Weber von Hartz was a part time worker. She was refused pension payments under her contract with her employer. She had a German state pension, on top, however. She claimed this was sex discrimination under TEEC art 119 (now TFEU art 157). She alleged that women work more part time, so they are at a disadvantage. Bilka-Kaufhaus argued it was justified in excluding part time workers because there are higher administrative costs for giving pensions to part time workers, given the work they do. They also said 81.3 per cent of all occupational pensions were paid to women, even though only 72% of employees were women, so the scheme was unrelated to sex discrimination.

Judgment

The ECJ, considered first whether pension payments were pay and held they were. They then asked whether there was potentially indirect discrimination, held that there could be, but that it was up to the member state court to determine the facts. There could be objective justification if the employer showed the disparate treatment was based on a "real need" of the business.