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

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Head of corporate promoted to director

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Firm strengthens international arbitration team with key London hire

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

FCA contentious financial regulation lawyer joins the team as of counsel

NEWS
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
Ian Gascoigne of LexisNexis dissects the uneasy balance between open justice and confidentiality in England’s civil courts, in this week's NLJ. From public hearings to super-injunctions, he identifies five tiers of privacy—from fully open proceedings to entirely secret ones—showing how a patchwork of exceptions has evolved without clear design
back-to-top-scroll