Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2003] All ER (D) 115 (Oct)
Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal
Judge:

Judge Peter Clark, Mr D Bleiman and Mr A Manners

Representation Robin Allen QC and Nicola Bragariza (instructed by the Equal Opportunities Commission) for the employee.
  Nicholas Paines QC and Clive Sheldon (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the employer.
Judgment Dates: 5 September 2003

Catchwords

Discrimination - Sex discrimination - Employment - Equal pay - Genuine material factor defence - Requirement to objectively justify variations in pay - s 1(3).

The Case

The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that European jurisprudence did not require a departure from domestic case law on the genuine material factor defence in s1(3) of the . Although variations in pay 'tainted by sex' had to be objectively justified, there was no requirement that in a case where the factor relied on by the employer is not tainted by direct sex discrimination and where no suggestion of prima facie indirect sex discrimination was raised, that it was nevertheless necessary for the employer to objectively justify the pay difference.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.