The claimants argued that civil servants in one government department could establish that civil servants in another department could stand as comparators in their equal pay claim.
Held: It was not necessarily the person with whom the workers have contracts of employment that determines comparability. The relevant body is the one ‘which is responsible for the inequality and which could restore equal treatment’. The body responsible for the state of affairs will often be the same employer of both the applicants and the comparators, but that is not necessarily so.
Judges:
Mr Justice Gage The Honerable Mr Justice Maurice Kay Lord Justice Mummery Mr Justice Gage The Honerable Mr Justice Maurice Kay Lord Justice Mummery
Citations:
[2005] EWCA Civ 138, [2005] ICR 750, [2005] IRLR 363,
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Considered – Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and Others ECJ 17-Sep-2002
The employees claimed sex discrimination, and sought to have as comparators, male employees of an employer who had previously employed some of them, before a TUPE transfer of the services supplied. The Court of Appeal referred to the court the . .
Cited – Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority and Another ECJ 27-Oct-1993
Discrimination – Shifting Burden of Proof
(Preliminary Ruling) A woman was employed as a speech therapist by the health authority. She complained of sex discrimination saying that at her level of seniority within the NHS, members of her profession which was overwhelmingly a female . .
Cited by:
Cited – Armstrong and others v Newcastle Upon Tyne NHS Hospital Trust CA 21-Dec-2005
The claimants claimed equal pay, asserting use of particular comparators. The Trust said that there was a genuine material factor justifying the difference in pay.
Held: To constitute a single source for the purpose of article 141, it is not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Discrimination, Employment
Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222866
