May 2019
« Jul    

Leverton v Clwyd County Council; HL 1989

References: [1989] ICR 33, [1989] IRLR 28
Coram: Lord Bridge of Harwich
The claimant, employed as a nursery nurse by the respondent in an infant school sought to compare herself with clerical staff employed by the respondent, but not in schools.
Held: The employee’s appeal succeeded. The majority of the Employment Tribunal, the Employment Appeal Tribunal, and the majority of the Court of Appeal were wrong to apply a narrower test as to whether the terms of the claimant and the comparator were broadly similar. It was sufficient to establish common terms and conditions to show that the claimant and her comparators were employed on terms and conditions derived from the same collective agreement.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – British Coal Corporation v Smith and Others HL (Times 23-May-96, Gazette 12-Sep-96, Gazette 03-Jul-96, [1996] ICR 515)
    The phrase ‘common terms of employment’ means broadly comparable terms. There is no need for them to be identical, and the phrase should be construed liberally, though there can be no general commonality where there is no commonality in terms and . .
  • Cited – White v Burton’s Foods Ltd EAT (Bailii, [2010] UKEAT 0514_09_0607)
    EAT EQUAL PAY ACT – Like work
    The Claimant had been employed by the Respondent since 1984 before becoming Production Planning Manager at the Respondent’s Blackpool site. She brought a claim under the Equal . .

Leave a Reply