Tag: Employment

Jones v Mid-Glamorgan County Council: EAT 8 May 1995

Citations:

[1995] UKEAT 1310 – 95 – 0805

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Jones v Mid-Glamorgan County Council CA 13-May-1997
On being told he was to be dismissed, Mr Jones had taken early retirement. He made a claim in the County Court that his pension had been wrongly reduced, The court rejected his allegation that he had acted under duress. His subsequent claim of . .
Cited – Sandhu v Jan De Rijk Transport Ltd CA 10-May-2007
The court was asked whether the claimant had been dismissed or had resigned. He had attended a meeting to be told that his contract was to be finished. The company later complained that he had resigned when they were unable to reach a compromise on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.209108

Tyldesley v TML Plastics Ltd: EAT 23 Mar 1995

Mrs Tyldesley complained that she had been paid less than a male comparator. The employer said the reason for this was that the comparator understood and was committed to the concept of total quality management. The tribunal had found that in relying on a s.1(3) defence the employer had to show, in addition to their being a variation genuinely due to a material factor which was not the difference in sex, the difference was objectively justified.
Held: The claimant’s appeal succeeded. It was not necessary in order to establish the defence to show objective justification unless the factor relied on was one which affected a considerably higher proportion of women than men, so as to be indirectly discriminatory and thus tainted by sex discrimination. Thus, it followed that it was sufficient if the employer genuinely believed (even if mistaken and even if the belief was not reasonable) that the factor was material: ‘the industrial tribunal erred in law in directing itself that the explanation for the difference in pay had to be objectively justified. It was sufficient in law that the explanation itself caused the difference or was a sufficient influence to be significant and relevant, whether or not that explanation was objectively justified.’

Judges:

Mummery J

Citations:

[1995] UKEAT 1044 – 93 – 2303, [1996] IRLR 395

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Sharp v Caledonia Group Services Ltd EAT 1-Nov-2005
EAT Equal Pay Act – Material factor defence – In an equal pay claim involving a presumption of direct discrimination the genuine material factor defence requires justification by objective criteria.
The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Discrimination

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.209035

South Durham Health Authority v Unison: EAT 6 Feb 1995

Mummery J P said: ‘Similarly in the case of entitlement to redundancy payments discussed in the authorities relied on by [counsel] there is no right of action, no entitlement to the payments before the date of termination has arrived. An originating payment for payment before a cause of action has arisen is therefore premature’.

Judges:

Mummery J P

Citations:

[1995] UKEAT 932 – 94 – 0602

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Foster v Bon Groundwork Ltd EAT 17-Mar-2011
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal
In April 2009, the Claimant, who was then 77 years of age, was employed by the Respondent, when he was laid off without pay. While still being employed by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.208954

John Knight (Animal By-Products) Ltd v Marshall: EAT 23 Feb 1995

Citations:

[1995] UKEAT 177 – 94 – 2302

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.208934

Del Grosso v Tom Cobleigh Plc: EAT 17 Dec 1996

Citations:

[1996] UKEAT 1058 – 95 – 1712

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Meek v City of Birmingham District Council CA 18-Feb-1987
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons
Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised.
Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.208786