Equal Pay in UK Law

In my opinion there must be implied in paragraph ( c) after the word "applies" the words "as between the woman and the man with whom she claims equality." The employer's construction is inconsistent with Community law and creates a permitted form of discrimination without rhyme or reason.

In para 17 it said that the concept of "worker" for the purposes of that article must be defined in accordance with the objective criteria which distinguish the employment relationship by reference to the rights and duties of the persons concerned, and that the essential feature of an employment relationship was that for a certain period of time a person performs services for and under the direction of another person in return for which he receives remuneration.

If it were to go forth that these grading systems are inoperative and operate against the Equal Pay Act, it would I think be disastrous for the ordinary running of efficient business. It seems to me that a grading system according to ability, skill and experience is an integral part of good business management: and, as long as it is fairly and genuinely applied irrespective of sex, there is nothing wrong with it at all.

work or for work to which equal value is attributed, the elimination of all discrimination on grounds of sex with regard to all aspects and conditions of remuneration. In particular, when a job classification system is used for determining pay, it must be based on the same criteria for both men and women, and so drawn up as to exclude any discrimination of the ground of sex."

Mrs. Dimond was at the time of the accident the owner and person in possession of her car. However even where the chattel is non profit earning (as was Mrs. Dimond's car) there may still be scope for awarding general damages for loss of use: The Mediana [1900] A.C. 113; Admiralty Commissioners v. S.S. Chekiang [1926] A.C. 637; Admiralty Commissioners v. Susquehanna [1926] A.C. 655.

Section 2(4) of the European Communities Act 1972 does not in my opinion enable or constrain a British court to distort the meaning of a British Statute in order to enforce against an individual a Community directive which has no direct effect between individuals. Section 2(4) applies and only applies where Community provisons are directly applicable.

The Court held, following Lawrie-Blum v Land Baden-Wurttemberg ( Case C-66/85) [1987] ICR 483 that "there must be considered as a worker a person who, for a certain period of time, performs services for and under the direction of another person in return for which he receives remuneration" (para 67). However, such people were to be distinguished from "independent providers of services who are not in a relationship of subordination with the person who receives the services" (para 68).