header-logo header-logo

Technicality did not halt case for Sainsbury's workers

19 April 2023
Issue: 8021 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , Procedure & practice , Equality
printer mail-detail
Sainsbury’s has lost its Court of Appeal bid to stop equal pay claims on the basis of a mistake in a reference number.

The supermarket giant argued that 700 claims submitted to the employment tribunal eight years ago should have been struck out because they did not include the correct reference number from a certificate issued by the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) showing they had completed the early conciliation process.

Delivering judgment this month in Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd v Clark and others [2023] EWCA Civ 386, however, Lord Justice Bean said: ‘These are highly technical applications lacking any substantive merit.

‘When industrial tribunals were established more than half a century ago the purpose of Parliament was to create a speedy and informal system free from technicalities. It has been repeatedly stated that employment tribunals should do their best not to place artificial barriers in the way of genuine claims.

‘It should be emphasised that there is no suggestion that any of these claimants failed to make the necessary reference to ACAS before the claim was issued, nor that any of them failed to obtain a certificate by ACAS demonstrating that such a reference had been made. The complaint is no more and no less than that the employment tribunal claim form did not give the appropriate certificate number.’

Leigh Day partners Linda Wong and Lauren Lougheed, representing the workers, said: ‘Women are still being paid less than men more than 60 years after the introduction of equal pay laws.

‘Sainsbury’s had a choice about defending these claims on their merits, or trying to reduce the number of claimants by making “highly technical applications”.’

The claims, which could result in tens of thousands of pounds in back pay being awarded if successful, will now move to an employment tribunal hearing scheduled for March 2024.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Firm promotes London international arbitration specialist to partnership

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Firm bolsters restructuring practice with senior London hires

HFW—Guy Marrison

HFW—Guy Marrison

Global aviation disputes practice boosted by London partner hire

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll