K Element & Ors. v Tesco Stores Limited

K Element & Ors. v Tesco Stores Limited

The 2014 Exercise was not a JES under s.80(5) Equality Act 2010 because it omitted key demand factors (physical effort/skills), was incomplete, and did not evaluate jobs as required by statute. The burden of proof under s.136 had not shifted at this preliminary stage, as a prima facie case on all aspects of the claim was not established.

Parties
Appellant: Ms K Element & Others (Leigh Day group); Appellant: Ms K Element & Others (Harcus Sinclair group); Respondent: Tesco Stores Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2022
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Equal Pay, Job Evaluation Study, Burden of Proof, Equality Act 2010

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ms K Element & Others (Leigh Day group)

Appellant

Ms K Element & Others (Harcus Sinclair group)

Appellant

Tesco Stores Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 What constitutes a Job Evaluation Study (JES) under s.80(5) Equality Act 2010?
  2. 2 Does the statutory burden of proof under s.136 Equality Act 2010 apply at a preliminary hearing to the JES question?

Ratio Decidendi

The 2014 Exercise was not a JES under s.80(5) Equality Act 2010 because it omitted key demand factors (physical effort/skills), was incomplete, and did not evaluate jobs as required by statute. The burden of proof under s.136 had not shifted at this preliminary stage, as a prima facie case on all aspects of the claim was not established.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The tribunal's finding that the 2014 Exercise was not a JES stands.