EAT slams City culture of pay secrecy

This report relates to 1 case(s)

• expand

  Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd [2003] IRLR 332 EAT (6 other reports)

  • Equal pay and sex discrimination: New guidance on burden of proof in sex discrimination claims

    Date:

    3 July 2003

    In Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd, the EAT holds that by the insertion of the new section 63A into the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, a "shifting" burden of proof is introduced into sex discrimination claims, making it necessary to set out fresh guidance as to the correct approach for employment tribunals to take.

  • Guidance on burden of proof

    Date:

    1 June 2003

    In Barton v Investec Henderson Crosthwaite Securities Ltd (3 April 2003), the EAT sets out guidance on the correct approach to the burden of proof in equal pay and sex discrimination cases.

  • Case round-up

    Date:

    1 June 2003

    Our resident experts at Pinsents bring you a comprehensive update on all the latest decisions that could affect your organisation, and advice on what to do about them.

  • Equal value update

    Date:

    1 May 2003

    Kate Godwin charts the recent developments on equal pay and reports on key equal value cases.

  • Case round-up: transparency of incentive schemes and time limits for making discrimination claims

    Date:

    22 April 2003

    This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: transparency of incentive schemes; and time limits for making discrimination claims.

  • Burden of proof for pay equality shifts to firms

    Date:

    15 April 2003

    The EAT's shrewd ruling over a City bonus claim has wide implications for all employers fighting sex discrimination cases and serves as a warning over transparent pay scales. By Makbool Javid of DLA.