Is it protected? The grey areas, settled.

Yes. At work, the protection runs for the "protected period": from the start of the pregnancy to the end of maternity leave, or earlier return to work. Treating a woman unfavourably during that period because of the pregnancy, a pregnancy-related illness, or because she is on or taking maternity leave is discrimination. There is no need to compare her with anyone else.

Unfavourable treatment because of pregnancy that happens after the protected period ends can still be sex discrimination.

Yes. The Act says less favourable treatment of a woman because she is breastfeeding counts as less favourable treatment because of sex.

Being a parent or carer is not a protected characteristic in itself. But a rigid rule, such as full-time hours only or no changes to start times, can be indirect sex discrimination if it puts women at a particular disadvantage and the employer cannot justify it. Tribunals often accept that women still carry more of the childcare.

Treating someone badly because they care for a disabled person can be direct disability discrimination or harassment by association, even though the employee is not disabled.

Separately, every employee can ask for flexible working from their first day.

Part-time work is not covered by the Equality Act, but part-time workers have their own protection. They must not be treated less favourably than a comparable full-time worker because they are part-time, unless that is objectively justified, and pay and benefits should normally be pro rata.

Because more women work part-time, treating part-timers worse can also be indirect sex discrimination.

Mental health is not a protected characteristic on its own. It is covered when it is a disability: a mental impairment with a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities.

"Substantial" only means more than minor or trivial. "Long-term" means it has lasted, or is likely to last, 12 months, or the rest of the person's life, and an effect that comes and goes counts if it is likely to recur. The effect is judged as it would be without treatment such as medication or therapy. For work cases, day-to-day activities include taking part fully and effectively in working life.

Neurodivergent conditions are not listed in the Act, so a diagnosis alone does not settle it. They are covered when they meet the disability test: a substantial (more than minor or trivial) and long-term effect on normal day-to-day activities, which for work includes taking part fully and effectively in working life.

Medical treatment and aids are ignored when judging the effect. Coping strategies the person has learned are different: they can reduce the effect, but the question is whether they hold up at work, for example under pressure or when routines change. Once someone is disabled, the employer must make reasonable adjustments, and must not treat them unfavourably because of something arising from their condition unless that is justified.

Yes, from the day of diagnosis. The Act treats each of these as a disability, so there is no need to show any effect on day-to-day activities.

Someone who has had a disability in the past, for example cancer now in remission, is still protected.

Covered if it meets the disability test: a substantial and long-term adverse effect on normal day-to-day activities. Conditions that fluctuate count if the effect is likely to recur, and a progressive condition can count before the effect becomes substantial if it is likely to get there.

Menopause is not a protected characteristic in its own right. Treatment linked to it can still be discrimination or harassment because of sex or age, and symptoms that meet the disability test can make someone disabled, which brings in the duty to make reasonable adjustments.

Jokes and comments about menopause can be harassment related to sex or age.

Addiction to alcohol, nicotine or any other substance is not treated as an impairment, unless the addiction began as a result of medically prescribed drugs or other medical treatment.

A condition caused by addiction, such as liver disease or depression, can still be a disability in its own right.

Seasonal hay fever is not treated as an impairment. It can be taken into account where it makes another condition worse, such as asthma.

Weight and appearance are not protected characteristics. A condition linked to weight can be a disability if it meets the disability test. A severe disfigurement is treated as a disability, but tattoos and decorative piercings are expressly excluded from that rule.

Dress and appearance rules can still be discriminatory if they treat men and women differently in a way that disadvantages one group, or clash with religious dress, unless justified.

Yes, for women and men alike. In April 2025 the Supreme Court held that "sex" in the Equality Act means biological sex (For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16).

Sexual harassment, and harassment related to sex, are unlawful separately from direct discrimination, and employers must take all reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment of their employees.

Yes. The protection covers anyone proposing to undergo, undergoing or having undergone a process, or part of a process, of reassigning their sex. Medical treatment is not required, and someone who has only proposed to transition is covered.

Yes. Orientation towards the same sex, the opposite sex, or either sex is protected.

Yes, at any age. Age is the one characteristic where even direct discrimination can be lawful, if the employer can show it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. That is a high bar.

Yes. Race includes colour, nationality, and ethnic or national origins.

Caste is not yet expressly listed: the Act requires the government to add it by order, and that order has not been made. Depending on the facts, a caste-related claim may still fall within ethnic origins.

Accent is not listed, but it is often closely linked to nationality or national or ethnic origin, so treating someone badly because of their accent can be race discrimination or harassment.

Yes. Any religion is covered, and so is having no religion.

A belief is protected if it is a philosophical belief. Tribunals use the test in Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360 (EAT): it must be genuinely held, be a belief rather than an opinion based on the information available, concern a weighty and substantial aspect of human life, have a certain cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance, and be worthy of respect in a democratic society.

Protecting a belief does not protect every way of expressing it. Employers can act on how a belief is expressed at work, if the response is proportionate.

Only being married or in a civil partnership is protected. Being single, engaged or cohabiting is not.

Direct discrimination is about treatment "because of a protected characteristic", not only the employee's own. So it covers treating someone badly because people think they are, say, gay or disabled, or because of who they are connected to, such as a disabled child. Harassment works the same way.

The exceptions: pregnancy and maternity at work only protects the woman herself, and marriage and civil partnership only protects the person who is married or a civil partner.

Yes, whatever their own characteristics. Treating someone badly because they complained of discrimination, brought or supported a claim, or gave evidence is victimisation. It doesn't matter whether the complaint turns out to be right, unless it was made in bad faith.