header-logo header-logo

30 October 2012
Issue: 7536 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Equal pay landmark

Supreme Court: equal pay claims can be held in civil courts

Hundreds of women have been granted leave to bring equal pay claims dating back six years, in a landmark Supreme Court judgment.

Ruling in Birmingham City Council v Abdulla & Ors [2012] UKSC 47, the court held that equal pay cases can be heard in the civil courts, where the time limit is six years, rather than the employment tribunal, where the time limit is six months.

Leigh Day & Co partner Chris Benson, who acted for the women, says the judgment effectively extends the time limit for equal pay claims, and is the biggest change to equal pay legislation since it was introduced in 1970.

The women say that they were employed on work rated as equivalent with that of their male comparators, but that their contracts did not provide for the substantial bonuses and other additional payments that were given to the men.

The case centred on the interpretation of s 2(3) of  the Equal Pay Act 1970 (EPA 1970), under which claims can be struck out by the courts if they can be “more conveniently disposed of separately by an employment tribunal”.

Lord Wilson, delivering the lead judgment, held that the courts should not strike out equal pay claims if they would be out of time in the employment tribunal.

His reasons were that EPA 1970 has no provision for the time limit to be extended at the discretion of the court or tribunal, and s 2(4) is worded so as to suggest equal pay claims in the employment tribunal are exempt from time limits.

A Birmingham City Council spokesperson says: “Equal pay litigation until now has always been pursued in employment tribunals, as these tribunals are experienced and specifically trained in dealing with such claims. In addition, there are very limited situations where costs follow the losing party, whereas in the civil court costs almost always follow the losing party.”

Issue: 7536 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll