header-logo header-logo

19 April 2023
Issue: 8021 / Categories: Legal News , Employment , Procedure & practice , Equality
printer mail-detail

Technicality did not halt case for Sainsbury's workers

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

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

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
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
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
back-to-top-scroll