Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council v Bainbridge & Ors ("Bainbridge 1")

Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council v Bainbridge & Ors ("Bainbridge 1")

Exclusion of women from pay protection schemes, where the exclusion perpetuates historic unlawful sex discrimination, constitutes indirect discrimination and requires objective justification. Where the employer knew or should have known of the discrimination and failed to consider or mitigate the discriminatory effect, justification will likely fail. Separate collective bargaining does not provide a defence if the arrangements are sex-tainted. Res judicata, merger, and election do not bar subsequent equal value claims after RAE claims for the same period. JESs do not have retroactive effect. No statutory grievance uplift is warranted where meetings would have been futile and no settlement...

Parties
Appellant/respondent: Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council; Respondents/appellants: Bainbridge & Ors; Appellant/respondent: Middlesbrough Borough Council; Respondents/appellants: Surtees & Ors; Intervener: Equality and Human Rights Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (employment/equal Pay) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Consolidated Appeals From Employment Appeal Tribunal
Outcome
Redcar's appeals dismissed; Middlesbrough claimants' appeal allowed; Middlesbrough's appeal dismissed; claimants' appeals on retroactive effect and statutory grievance uplift dismissed.
Legal Topics
Equal Pay, Indirect Discrimination, Objective Justification, Collective Bargaining, Res Judicata, Retroactive Effect, Statutory Grievance Procedures
Employment Law Equality Law European Union Law Equal Pay Indirect Discrimination Objective Justification Collective Bargaining Res Judicata +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council

Appellant/respondent

Bainbridge & Ors

Respondents/appellants

Middlesbrough Borough Council

Appellant/respondent

Surtees & Ors

Respondents/appellants

Equality and Human Rights Commission

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (employment/equal Pay) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Consolidated Appeals From Employment Appeal Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pay protection schemes excluding women previously discriminated against constitute unlawful sex discrimination under the Equal Pay Act 1970 and Article 141 EC Treaty.
  2. 2 Whether separate collective bargaining arrangements provide a valid material factor defence to equal pay claims.
  3. 3 Whether res judicata, merger, or election bar subsequent equal value claims after RAE claims for the same period.

Ratio Decidendi

Exclusion of women from pay protection schemes, where the exclusion perpetuates historic unlawful sex discrimination, constitutes indirect discrimination and requires objective justification. Where the employer knew or should have known of the discrimination and failed to consider or mitigate the discriminatory effect, justification will likely fail. Separate collective bargaining does not provide a defence if the arrangements are sex-tainted. Res judicata, merger, and election do not bar subsequent equal value claims after RAE claims for the same period. JESs do not have retroactive effect. No statutory grievance uplift is warranted where meetings would have been futile and no settlement...

Court Disposition

Redcar's appeals dismissed; Middlesbrough claimants' appeal allowed; Middlesbrough's appeal dismissed; claimants' appeals on retroactive effect and statutory grievance uplift dismissed.

Orders

  • Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council to pay Bainbridge claimants' costs in the appeal, £35,000 on account within 28 days.
  • Middlesbrough Borough Council to pay Surtees claimants' costs in the appeal, £40,000 on account within 28 days.