Brierley & Ors v ASDA Stores Ltd

Brierley & Ors v ASDA Stores Ltd

Claims by multiple claimants can only be joined on the same claim form under Rule 9 if their roles and work are the same or so similar that the claims are based on the same set of facts. Where claims are irregularly joined, the tribunal has discretion under Rule 6 to waive the irregularity, particularly where there is no prejudice to respondents and no evidence of cynical conduct by claimants. The loss of a windfall limitation defence to respondents is not genuine prejudice.

Parties
Appellants: Ms S Brierley & Others; Respondent: Asda Stores Limited; Appellants: Mrs A Ahmed and Others; Respondent: Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited; Respondent: Lloyds Pharmacy Limited; Appellants: Mr A Fenton & Others
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in Brierley v Asda; appeal dismissed in Fenton v Asda; Ahmed v Sainsbury’s remitted for further consideration.
Legal Topics
Equal Pay, Employment Tribunal Procedure, Multiple Claims, Case Management, Limitation Periods
Employment Law Civil Procedure Equal Pay Employment Tribunal Procedure Multiple Claims Case Management Limitation Periods

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms S Brierley & Others

Appellants

Asda Stores Limited

Respondent

Mrs A Ahmed and Others

Appellants

Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Limited

Respondent

Lloyds Pharmacy Limited

Respondent

Mr A Fenton & Others

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Employment Appeal Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether multiple claimants performing different jobs can present claims on the same claim form under Rule 9 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
  2. 2 Whether irregularity in claim presentation should be waived under Rule 6
  3. 3 Whether respondents suffer prejudice by waiver of irregularity, particularly regarding limitation periods

Ratio Decidendi

Claims by multiple claimants can only be joined on the same claim form under Rule 9 if their roles and work are the same or so similar that the claims are based on the same set of facts. Where claims are irregularly joined, the tribunal has discretion under Rule 6 to waive the irregularity, particularly where there is no prejudice to respondents and no evidence of cynical conduct by claimants. The loss of a windfall limitation defence to respondents is not genuine prejudice.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in Brierley v Asda; appeal dismissed in Fenton v Asda; Ahmed v Sainsbury’s remitted for further consideration.

Orders

  • Set aside the EAT order in Brierley v Asda and remit cases to the Employment Tribunal to proceed on the merits.
  • Remit Ahmed v Sainsbury’s to the Employment Tribunal for determination of any remaining Rule 9 irregularity and Rule 6 waiver issues in accordance with this judgment.