EAT Equal Pay Act – Equal value
When an Independent Expert has been appointed by an Employment Tribunal to report on an equal value question, rule 11(4) of Sched 6 to Employment Tribunal Regulations 2004 allows a party to call another expert provided this evidence does not challenge the facts. When an IE did not disclose his full methodology until he published his report, the Respondent was entitled to call an expert to challenge the IE’s methodology on weighting of factors and conventions to avoid double counting. Employment Tribunal Chairman’s Judgment set aside.
Judges:
McMullen QC J
Citations:
[2007] UKEAT 0417 – 07 – 2408, [2008] ICR 349, [2007] IRLR 981
Links:
Statutes:
Equal Pay Act 1970 2A(4), Employment Tribunal Regulations 2004
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Middlesbrough Borough Council v Surtees and others EAT 17-Jul-2007
EAT EQUAL PAY ACT
Material factor defence
European law
Certain employees of the Council claimed equal pay with respect to their chosen comparators. In some cases the claim related to a period . .
Cited – Hayward v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Ltd HL 1984
The system of job evaluation when selecting for redundancies, for which there is uniquely by statue the designation of an expert, is one which is susceptible to different methodologies. . .
Cited – Aldridge v Telecommunications Plc EAT 1989
. .
Cited by:
Cited – Sheffield City Council v Crosby and others EAT 17-Feb-2009
EAT EQUAL PAY ACT: Material factor defence and justification
GMF defence- whether objective justification required from employer. ET distinguished permissibly between 2 groups of (predominantly female) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment, Discrimination
Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.259820