Updated to include information on a Government consultation on mandatory gender pay gap reporting for public-sector employers.
The Court of Appeal has ruled that the employment tribunal has no power to stay proceedings indefinitely for the purpose of compelling the claimants to bring a new action in the High Court.
Cases on appeal provides news on key case law developments that are expected.
The Supreme Court has held that the fact that the work of the claimants' chosen comparators has to be carried on in a different place of work out of necessity is no barrier to bringing an equal pay claim.
Definition from the XpertHR glossary.
The Court of Session has held that a group of administrative and clerical female workers making equal pay claims against a local authority were on "common terms and conditions" with a group of male manual workers who were based in different locations.
In Hovell v Ashford and St Peter's Hospital NHS Trust  IRLR 734 CA, the Court of Appeal held that a small difference in points between a woman's job and that of her equivalently rated comparator in a job evaluation scheme does not of itself establish that the jobs are of equal value. However, where the employee's job has been marked lower than her comparator's, an employment tribunal is not bound by law to order an independent expert's report before determining the equal value claim. This is a matter for the discretion of the tribunal.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held that a previous EAT decision that a woman claiming equal pay could rely on her successor in the post as a comparator is incorrect.
HR and legal information and guidance relating to equal pay for work of equal value.