Carl v. The University of Sheffield [2009] UKEAT 0261_08_1505 (15 May 2009)

Carl v. The University of Sheffield [2009] UKEAT 0261_08_1505 (15 May 2009)

A claimant under the Part Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 must rely on an actual comparator, not a hypothetical one, except in the limited circumstances set out in regulations 3 and 4. Furthermore, less favourable treatment need not be solely on the ground of part-time status; it is sufficient if part-time status is an effective cause. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to conclude that the actual comparator relied on by the claimant was not a true comparator, and the claim was correctly dismissed.

Citation
[2009] UKEAT 0261_08_1505
Parties
Claimant/appellant: Mrs Carl; Respondent/cross Appellant: University of Sheffield
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
15 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Claimant's appeal dismissed; Respondent's cross-appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
Part Time Workers, Comparators, Less Favourable Treatment, Causation, Interpretation of Regulations
Employment Law Part Time Workers Comparators Less Favourable Treatment Causation Interpretation of Regulations

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Carl

Claimant/appellant

University of Sheffield

Respondent/cross Appellant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claimant may rely on a hypothetical comparator in a PTWR claim
  2. 2 Whether part-time worker status must be the sole reason for less favourable treatment under PTWR

Ratio Decidendi

A claimant under the Part Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2000 must rely on an actual comparator, not a hypothetical one, except in the limited circumstances set out in regulations 3 and 4. Furthermore, less favourable treatment need not be solely on the ground of part-time status; it is sufficient if part-time status is an effective cause. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to conclude that the actual comparator relied on by the claimant was not a true comparator, and the claim was correctly dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claimant's appeal dismissed; Respondent's cross-appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Claim under PTWR dismissed; claimant cannot rely on a hypothetical comparator.