header-logo header-logo

Employment

17 March 2011
Issue: 7457 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Ashby and others v Birmingham City Council [2011] EWHC 424 (QB), [2011] All ER (D) 48 (Mar) Queen’s Bench Division Slade J 3 Mar 2011

A court considering whether to strike out an equal pay claim or counterclaim under s 2(3) of the Equal Pay Act 1970 engaged in a two stage process. First, it would decide whether the claim could more conveniently be disposed of separately by an employment tribunal. If the court concluded that the claim could be more conveniently disposed of separately by an employment tribunal it would decide whether to exercise discretion to strike out the claim. Consideration should be given to the facts and circumstances of the particular proceedings and claims before the court.

Proceedings based on an equality clause were based on claims for breach of contract. The appropriateness of disposal of an equal pay claim in an employment tribunal was not determined by whether other claims were included in the proceedings. However, the fact that the only claim in court proceedings was for equal pay was a factor which could be taken

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Leeds office strengthened with triple partner hire

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Corporate lawyer joins as partner in London office

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll