header-logo header-logo

08 February 2007
Issue: 7259 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

DISCRIMINATION

Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council v Bainbridge [2007] IRLR 91

(i) Although budgetary considerations cannot be the sole justification for failing to give effect to the principle of equal pay, they could be a factor to be weighed with other considerations when determining whether the difference in pay can be objectively justified. However, financial considerations cannot form part of an employer’s defence where the purpose is merely to save costs.

(ii) Although the employer must show that the difference in pay has remained objectively justified throughout the relevant period, it is not obliged to remove or mitigate the effects of any genuine material factor simply because the disparity has continued for some time.

(iii) It is inherent in the principle of proportionality that where different means of achieving a particular objective could be achieved, the one which has the least discriminatory impact should be chosen. A tribunal considering objective justification is therefore obliged to have regard to whether different and less discriminatory means could have been used to achieve the same objective.

Issue: 7259 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll