header-logo header-logo

19 March 2009
Issue: 7361 / Categories: Case law , Discrimination , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Discrimination

Gibson v Sheffield City Council [2009] All ER (D) 133 (Mar)

An employer is not required to provide objective justification for the pay differential between the female claimants and their male comparators where he shows that the difference in treatment is not “tainted by sex” (following Surtees v Middlesborough County Council [2008] EWCA Civ 885; [2008] IRLR 776), [2008] All ER (D) 386 (Jul).

Where the employer identifies some particular and specific factor which he contends caused the difference in pay but which is applied only to a predominantly male group, it will be sex-tainted unless he can show that the factor applied only so as to benefit the male group but for nondiscriminatory reasons.

If, but only if, the employer cannot show that the reason was not due to the difference of sex, he must show objective justification for the disparity between the woman’s contract and the man’s contract (see also Hartlepool Borough Council v Dolphin [2009] IRLR 168).

Issue: 7361 / Categories: Case law , Discrimination , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll