The claimants in this case involved around 6,000 current and former workers for the respondent who worked in the stores.   The basis of the claim by the female claimants was that their work was of equal value of the work undertaken by their male colleagues in the distribution centres. The case before the European Court of Justice was a preliminary reference from the case that has been going through the domestic courts.   The claimant’s raised arguments based upon the equal pay provisions within the Equality Act 2010 as well as Article 157 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.  Article 157 states:

‘Each Member State shall ensure that the principle of equal pay for male and female workers for equal work or work of equal value is applied.’

The issue was whether Article 157 had direct effect into the national law of the United Kingdom.   The respondent argued that it did not on two grounds.  The first was that it could not be applied to ‘work of equal value’ as it was not sufficiently precise in its remit.  The second was that that they were not the ‘single source’ for the terms and conditions for both the workers in the stores and the workers in the distribution centre.

The European Court of Justice outlined that Article 157 must be interpreted in a way which does give it direct effect.  They outline that it is ‘clear and precise’ as to the obligation placed upon the Member State and the particular result which should be achieved.  The result is that there should be equal pay for male and female workers when it comes to work of equal value.

Therefore, the argument by the respondent that it should only apply when the workers of different sex perform equal work was refused. It also extends to work that can be regarded as having ‘equal value’.   In determining whether there is work of an equal value, which will be a factual matter for the domestic court to consider.   Accordingly, Article 157 can be relied upon by claimants in the domestic court due to its direct effect.

Practical Lessons

This case demonstrates the wide nature in which direct effect operates and the ECJ is clear that the term ‘equal value’ is clear and precise.  To this end, the domestic courts can determine factually how that applies but that it can be pleaded by a claimant in taking an equal pay claim.  This gives an added argument that can be pleaded by those who are taking equal pay claims.
https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=242024&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=9527950