All items: Effect of EC law

• expand

  Abbott and others v Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Trust [2006] All ER (D) 140 (Jan) EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Abbott and others v Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Trust

    Date:

    10 February 2006

    In Abbott and others v Cheshire and Wirral Partnership NHS Trust [2006] All ER (D) 140 (Jan) EAT, the Employment Appeal Tribunal has held that an employment tribunal in an equal pay claim failed to consider the balance between the discriminatory effect of not paying bonuses to a group of employees and the objective justification for that decision.

• expand

  Abdoulaye and others v Régie Nationale Des Usines Renault SA [1999] IRLR 811 ECJ (2 reports relating to this case)

  • Pregnancy and maternity: Compensatory maternity allowance does not breach EC law

    Date:

    15 November 1999

    In Abdoulaye and others v Régie Nationale des Usines Renault SA, the ECJ rules that Article 141 of the Treaty of Rome does not preclude the making of a lump-sum payment exclusively to female workers who take maternity leave where that payment is designed to offset the occupational disadvantages which arise for those workers as a result of their being away from work.

  • Maternity bonus lawful

    Date:

    1 September 1999

    In Abdoulaye and others v Regie Nationale des Usines Renault SA the European Court of Justice has ruled that a maternity bonus to women did not discriminate against men so as to contravene Article 119 of the EC Treaty.

• expand

  Alabaster v Barclays Bank plc and Secretary of State for Social Security (No.2) [2005] IRLR 576 CA (4 reports relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: case law update

    Date:

    3 February 2006

    We review recent significant equal pay cases and their implications. Developments of note include the application of the "single source" test to comparators within an employment unit, and a reference to the ECJ on whether use of length of service as a pay system criterion requires specific objective justification.

  • Maternity leave and equal pay: Male comparator not required in maternity pay claim

    Date:

    24 June 2005

    In Alabaster v Barclays Bank plc, the Court of Appeal holds that the answer to the problem of how to enable an employee effectively to enforce her right to claim arrears of maternity pay (owed to her as a result of a failure to take into account a pay rise awarded before her maternity leave started, but after the reference period for calculating her maternity pay had ended) lay in removing the requirement in s.1(1) of the Equal Pay Act 1970 for her to point to a male comparator.

  • No need for male comparator in maternity equal pay claims

    Date:

    1 June 2005

    In Alabaster v Barclays Bank plc and the Secretary of State for Social Security (3 May 2005), the Court of Appeal holds that in equal pay claims relating to maternity, the requirement for a male comparator in s.1 of the Equal Pay Act should be disapplied in order to comply with art. 141 of the EC Treaty.

  • Ruling leads to changes in SMP pay rise awards

    Date:

    10 May 2005

    Catherine Taylor, employment partner at Olswang, looks at the implications for employers of the recent adjustment of domestic law to comply with the ECJ's ruling that pay rises must be reflected in statutory maternity pay.

• expand

  Alabaster v Woolwich plc and Secretary of State for Social Security [2000] IRLR 754 EAT (2 reports relating to this case)

  • SMP Regulations breach EU law

    Date:

    1 September 2000

    In Alabaster v Woolwich plc and Secretary of State for Social Security, the EAT has ruled that an amendment made to the Statutory Maternity Pay Regulations failed to implement fully the European Court's decision in the Gillespie case because it does not allow women on maternity leave the benefit of pay increases that are not backdated.

  • Maternity pay: Benefit of non-backdated pay increase should have been added to maternity pay

    Date:

    15 June 2000

    In Alabaster v Woolwich plc and another, the EAT holds that a woman was entitled to see the benefit of a pay increase awarded before she went on maternity leave reflected in the calculation of her earnings-related, higher-rate statutory maternity pay ("SMP").

• expand

  Alabaster v Woolwich plc and Secretary of State for Social Security [2002] IRLR 420 CA (1 report relating to this case)

  • Equal value update

    Date:

    1 May 2003

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

• expand

  Alabaster v Woolwich plc and Secretary of State for Social Security [2004] IRLR 486 ECJ (4 reports relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: SMP must include pay rise effective after reference period

    Date:

    18 June 2004

    In Alabaster v Woolwich plc, the European Court of Justice holds that article 119 (now 141) of the EC Treaty of Rome requires that earnings-related maternity pay must reflect any pay rise awarded between the start of the reference period (upon which the level of the earnings-related maternity pay is based) and the end of the employee's maternity leave.

  • Maternity pay to include all pay rises during maternity leave

    Date:

    1 June 2004

    In Alabaster v (1) Woolwich plc and (2) Secretary of State for Social Security, the ECJ rules that the earnings-related element of statutory maternity pay must include a pay rise made at any time before the end of maternity leave.

  • Maternity rights: gap in the law highlighted

    Date:

    1 May 2004

    The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that a woman who receives a pay rise at any time before the end of her maternity leave must receive the benefit of this in the earnings-related part of her maternity pay.

  • Case round up: incorporated contract terms; and calculating statutory maternity pay

    Date:

    20 April 2004

    This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: incorporated contract terms; and calculating statutory maternity pay.

• expand

  Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College and others [2004] IRLR 224 ECJ (8 reports relating to this case)

  • European Union: ECJ case law round-up

    Date:

    1 March 2005

    In our latest round-up of cases from the European Court of Justice, we look at cases on equal pay, maternity leave and equal treatment, the variation of terms relating to early retirement following a transfer of an undertaking, working time and European Works Councils.

  • Access to occupational pension schemes for the self-employed?

    Date:

    1 March 2004

    The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has published its ruling in Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College.

  • Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College and others

    Date:

    1 March 2004

    In Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College and others [2004] IRLR 224 ECJ, the European Court of Justice held that a female lecturer employed via an agency could not claim equal pay in relation to a male lecturer employed directly by the college. The employment agency and the college could not be construed as being the same employer, and the differences in equal pay could not be attributed to a single source, so there was no single body responsible for the inequality.

  • Agency worker is entitled to membership of pension scheme

    Date:

    1 March 2004

    In Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College and others, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) rules that a lecturer employed through an agency could not claim equal pay with lecturers employed directly by the college, but she could claim entitlement to join the lecturers' statutory pension scheme even though it was open only to those with a contract of employment.

  • ECJ decides on agency workers' rights

    Date:

    6 February 2004

    The ECJ has delivered its decision in the case of Allonby.

  • Case round-up: identity of the employer in a tribunal claim; and equal pay for an agency worker

    Date:

    3 February 2004

    This week's case round-up from Eversheds, covering: the identity of the employer in a tribunal claim; and equal pay for an agency worker.

  • Part-timers, equal pay and pensions

    Date:

    1 February 2004

    There have been two recent decisions on part timers' access to pension schemes under equal pay legislation; one from the European Court (ECJ) and another from the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).

  • Case round up

    Date:

    1 February 2004

    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.

• expand

  Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College [2000] EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: Comparator employed by different employer from claimant was not in "same employment"

    Date:

    15 July 2000

    A man employed by a college was not employed in the "same employment", within the meaning of the Equal Pay Act 1970, as a woman who was employed by a company which supplied her under a contract made with the college, holds the EAT in Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College and others.

• expand

  Allonby v Accrington and Rossendale College [2001] IRLR 364 CA (4 reports relating to this case)

  • Sex discrimination and equal pay: Inadequate explanation of why condition for avoiding dismissal was objectively justified

    Date:

    1 June 2001

    An employment tribunal erred in deciding that the sexually discriminatory condition of being in salaried as opposed to hourly-paid employment to avoid dismissal was objectively justifiable, holds the Court of Appeal in Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College and others.

  • Contract worker can compare with employees

    Date:

    1 June 2001

    In Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College the Court of Appeal has ruled that an employer can be liable under the Sex Discrimination Act for discriminating against a contract worker by offering her terms and conditions which are less favourable than those offered to its own employees.

  • Employer must show "real need"

    Date:

    1 June 2001

    In Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College the Court of Appeal has held that once an employment tribunal has made a finding that a requirement or condition has a disparate impact on women, the tribunal is obliged to make a critical evaluation of whether the employers' reasons for imposing the conditions demonstrated a "real need".

  • Comparator claim to ECJ

    Date:

    1 June 2001

    In Allonby v Accrington & Rossendale College, the Court of Appeal has referred two questions on equal pay to the European Court of Justice.

• expand

  Angestelltenbetriebsrat der Wiener Gebietskrankenkasse v Wiener Gebietskrankenkasse [1999] IRLR 804 ECJ (2 reports relating to this case)

  • Equal pay: Differently trained groups of professionals performing same tasks did not do "the same work"

    Date:

    1 July 1999

    In Angestelltenbetriebsrat der Wiener Gebietskrankenkasse v Wiener Gebietskrankenkasse, the European Court of Justice rules that psychotherapists with a degree in psychology, most of whom were women, did not do "the same work", within the meaning of Article 119 (now, after amendment, Article 141) of the Treaty of Rome, as higher-paid and predominantly male doctors employed as psychotherapists.

  • Different qualifications negate same work

    Date:

    1 July 1999

    In Angestelltenbetriebsrat der Wiener Gebietskrankenkasse v Wiener Gebietskrankenkasse (11 May 1999) EOR86A, the European Court of Justice rules that European Community law does not require the same salaries to be paid to psychotherapists with different training and qualifications.