W Augustine v Data Cars Ltd

W Augustine v Data Cars Ltd

The Employment Tribunal erred in its approach to less favourable treatment by failing to apply a pro rata analysis, as required by the PTWR and Directive. However, under binding precedent (McMenemy), less favourable treatment must be solely on the ground of part-time status, which was not established on the facts. The Tribunal also erred by focusing on the employer’s intention rather than the reason for the treatment.

Parties
Appellant: Mr W Augustine; Respondent: Data Cars Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Employment Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; claim under regulation 5 PTWR fails under current binding precedent.
Legal Topics
Part Time Workers, Less Favourable Treatment, Pro Rata Principle, Causation in Discrimination
Employment Law Part Time Workers Less Favourable Treatment Pro Rata Principle Causation in Discrimination

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr W Augustine

Appellant

Data Cars Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Employment Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was treated less favourably than a comparable full-time worker under the Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 (PTWR)
  2. 2 Whether the less favourable treatment was on the ground that the claimant was a part-time worker, and the relevance of the employer’s intention

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in its approach to less favourable treatment by failing to apply a pro rata analysis, as required by the PTWR and Directive. However, under binding precedent (McMenemy), less favourable treatment must be solely on the ground of part-time status, which was not established on the facts. The Tribunal also erred by focusing on the employer’s intention rather than the reason for the treatment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; claim under regulation 5 PTWR fails under current binding precedent.

Orders

  • Parties may make written representations on disposal within seven days of judgment.
  • Any consequential applications or representations to be filed and served within the same period.