Law reports

All items: Work of equal value

  • expand

    Jämställdhetsombudsmannen v Örebro Läns Landsting [2000] IRLR 421 ECJ (3 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.

    • Basic salary to be compared

      Date:
      1 September 2000

      The European Court of Justice has ruled in Jamstalldhetsombudsmannen v Orebro Lans Landsting that the equal pay principle applies to each of the elements of remuneration.

    • Equal pay: Inconvenient-hours supplement did not count towards basis for pay comparison

      Date:
      1 July 2000

      In Jämställdhetsombudsmannen v Örebro Läns Landsting, the European Court of Justice rules that, in comparing the pay of two midwives and that of a clinical technician assumed to be doing work of equal value, no account should be taken of the fact that the midwives were paid a supplement for working inconvenient hours and that they worked fewer hours per week. The midwives' monthly basic salary should be compared with that of their comparator.

  • expand

    Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others [1999] IRLR 148 EAT (3 reports relating to this case)

    • Claim by ex-council staff rejected

      Date:
      1 June 1999

      In Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others the EAT has ruled that in order to bring an equal pay claim, the applicant and comparator must be in the same establishment or service.

    • Equal pay: No comparison permitted between former council staff and existing employees

      Date:
      15 March 1999

      An employment tribunal had correctly concluded that former council employees working for a contractor providing contracted-out services could not compare themselves with existing council staff doing work that had previously been found to be of equal value to their own, holds the EAT in Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care and others. While Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome does not limit permissible comparisons to those employed by the same employer, the applicant and comparator in an equal pay claim must nevertheless "in a loose and non-technical sense be in the same establishment or service". There was nothing about the present case "which would distinguish it from any other case where an applicant claimed equal pay with a comparator employed by another company, not necessarily even engaged in the same industry".

    • Limit to equal pay comparison

      Date:
      1 March 1999

      In Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others (5 November 1998) EOR84C, the EAT holds that former employees of a county council, who are now employed by private contractors, are not entitled to bring an equal pay claim relying on Article 119 of the EC Treaty comparing themselves with current employees of the council whose work had been rated as equivalent to their own.

  • expand

    Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others [2000] IRLR 608 CA (2 reports relating to this case)

    • Comparator issue to ECJ

      Date:
      1 March 2001

      The Court of Appeal in Lawrence v Regent Office Care has referred to the European Court of Justice questions as to whether employees who are now employed by private contractors, including former employees of a county council, are entitled to bring an equal pay claim relying on Article 141 of the EC Treaty to compare themselves with current employees of the council whose work had been rated as of equal value to their own.

    • Equal pay: Can workers transferred on contracting out compare their pay with that of retained workers?

      Date:
      15 July 2000

      In Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others, the Court of Appeal refers to the European Court of Justice the question of whether or not female workers employed by contractors in the provision of services contracted out by a council can compare their pay with that of male workers in the council's employment whose work is of equal value to theirs.

  • expand

    Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others [2002] IRLR 822 ECJ (7 reports relating to this case)

    • Equal pay: case law update

      Date:
      2 March 2007

      This article looks at some of the significant judgments in the area of equal pay over the past year and their implications.

    • 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.

    • Equal value update

      Date:
      1 May 2003

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

    • Equal pay: Transferred workers cannot compare their pay with retained workers

      Date:
      10 January 2003

      Article 141 of the EC Treaty of Rome is not limited to situations where men and women work for the same employer, but it does not cover the situation where pay differences between equal pay claimants and their comparators cannot be attributed to a single source, so that there is no single body responsible for the inequality and which can restore equal treatment, the European Court of Justice holds in Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others.

    • EC: ECJ case law round-up

      Date:
      1 January 2003

      In our latest round-up of decisions from the European Court of Justice (ECJ), we look at cases on equal pay, the principle of equal treatment as related to working conditions, the meaning of a transfer for the purposes of the business transfers Directive and, finally, guarantee payments to employees following the insolvency of their employers.

    • Case round-up: equal pay claims

      Date:
      29 October 2002

      This week's case round-up looks at equal pay claims.

    • Cross-employer comparison rejected

      Date:
      1 October 2002

      In Lawrence and others v Regent Office Care Ltd and others (17 September 2002), the European Court of Justice has ruled that former employees of a county council, who are now employed by private contractors, are not entitled to bring an equal pay claim relying on Article 141 of the EC Treaty comparing themselves with current employees of the council whose work had been rated as equivalent to their own.

  • expand

    Lawson and others v Britfish Ltd [1988] IRLR 53 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

  • expand

    Lawson v (1) South Tees District Health Authority and (2) The Secretary of State for Health [1998] ET/17931/87 (1 report relating to this case)

    • ET calls for changes to equal value procedure

      Date:
      1 March 1999

      In Lawson v (1) South Tees District Health Authority and (2) The Secretary of State for Health a London South employment tribunal (Chair: E R Donnelly) rules that a speech therapist was employed on work of equal value to that of a pharmacist, and makes detailed proposals for reforming the equal value procedure.

  • expand

    Leverton v Clwyd County Council [1988] IRLR 239 CA (1 report relating to this case)

    • Comparator must have broadly similar terms for cross-establishment equal value claim

      Date:
      1 July 1988

      In Leverton v Clwyd County Council (17.3.88) EOR20C, the Court of Appeal holds that a complainant and her comparators in different establishments must be employed on "broadly similar" terms and conditions in order for "common terms and conditions" to be observed between the establishments so as to permit an equal value comparison.

  • expand

    Leverton v Clwyd County Council [1989] IRLR 28 HL (2 reports relating to this case)

    • Criteria for cross-establishment equal pay claim

      Date:
      1 March 1989

      In Leverton v Clwyd County Council (15.12.88) EOR24C, the House of Lords rules that whether there are "common terms and conditions" observed between two establishments so as to enable an equal pay comparison to be made requires a "broad" comparison between the terms observed at the two establishments, applicable either to all the employees or employees of the class to which the complainant and her comparator belong.

    • Equal pay: Cross-establishment equal pay claims

      Date:
      24 January 1989

      A woman can claim equal pay with a man working in a different establishment even if her own terms and conditions of employment are not "broadly similar" to his, provided that common terms and conditions are observed at their establishments, either generally or for employees of their respective classes.

  • expand

    Leverton v Clwyd County Council 11 June 1986 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

    • Hours and holiday differences bar cross-establishment equal value claim

      Date:
      1 September 1986

      In Leverton v Clwyd County Council (11.6.86) EOR9D, the EAT upholds a finding that differences in hours of work and holiday entitlements between a nursery nurse and her male comparators employed in different establishments meant that common terms and conditions were not observed between the establishments, thus precluding an equal value comparison.

  • expand

    Lloyds Bank plc v Fox and others [1989] IRLR 103 EAT (1 report relating to this case)

    • Employer's expert has no right to interview equal value applicant

      Date:
      1 March 1989

      In Lloyds Bank plc v Fox and others (15.12.88) EOR24F, the EAT holds that there is no power under the Industrial Tribunals Rules of Procedure to compel an equal value complainant to be interviewed about her job by an expert appointed by the employer. Any information must be given voluntarily.

About this category

Precedent-setting cases from the EAT and appellate courts, along with reports of selected tribunal cases, relating to equal pay: work of equal value.