Morgan v Middlesbrough Borough Council [2005] EWCA Civ 1432 (19 July 2005)

Morgan v Middlesbrough Borough Council [2005] EWCA Civ 1432 (19 July 2005)

The Employment Tribunal was entitled, on the evidence and findings of fact, to conclude that Mrs Morgan was not employed on like-work with Mr Mell due to significant differences in the nature and extent of their duties, the size and type of school, and the routine versus managerial content of their roles. Any deficiencies in the Tribunal's reasoning were stylistic and did not amount to an error of law.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1432
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Angela Morgan; Respondent/appellant: Middlesbrough Borough Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Equal Pay, Like Work Comparison, Employment Tribunal Procedure
Employment Law Equality Law Equal Pay Like Work Comparison Employment Tribunal Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angela Morgan

Appellant/respondent

Middlesbrough Borough Council

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in finding that Mrs Morgan was not employed on like-work with Mr Mell under section 1 of the Equal Pay Act 1970
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal was correct to set aside the Employment Tribunal's decision for insufficient findings and reasons

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal was entitled, on the evidence and findings of fact, to conclude that Mrs Morgan was not employed on like-work with Mr Mell due to significant differences in the nature and extent of their duties, the size and type of school, and the routine versus managerial content of their roles. Any deficiencies in the Tribunal's reasoning were stylistic and did not amount to an error of law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order of the Employment Appeal Tribunal set aside
  • Respondent to pay appellant's costs, to be assessed if not agreed