The employees were civil servants employed by the first respondent Minister and assigned to clerical duties in the national police force. The employees claimed they were engaged in work equal to the work performed by other male police employees in 'clerical' posts. Proceedings were brought by the employees between 2000 and 2005 before the Equality Tribunal through their trade union.

The Tribunal found in favour of seven of the employees and rejected the claims of the other seven. All parties to the proceedings appealed the decision to the Labour Court (Ireland). The Labour Court decided the ratio of men to women in the relevant groups showed prima facie evidence of indirect pay discrimination and following the consent of the parties, decided to investigate any objective justification of the prima facie case of indirect pay discrimination. The court assumed the employees in the main proceedings and the chosen comparators were engaged in 'like work' within the meaning of s 7(1) of the Employment Equality (Ireland) Act 1998.

As a result, the court needed the Minister to prove objective justification. The Minister decided the arrangement of police officers in such reserved clerical and designated posts was justified so as to satisfy the operative requirements of the force. To this end, it was appropriate to pay police officers performing this work the rate applicable to their rank as members of the police force.

The Labour Court upheld the Minister's appeal and dismissed that of the other parties. The employees then appealed to the High Court (Ireland). The High Court decided to refer certain questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (the Court). The High Court sought to determine what the employer's justification of the prima facie case of indirect gender discrimination in pay consisted of, the workers in relation to whom such justification should be provided and whether the interests of good industrial relations could be taken into account when examining that justification. The Court made this determination in consideration of art 141 EC Treaty and Council Directive (EEC) 75/117 (on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the application of the principle of equal pay for men and women) (the Directive), The Court decided Article 141 EC and the Directive established that employees may be considered comparable if performing the same work or work to which equal value may be attached and if there are similarities in nature of the work, the training requirements and the working conditions.

The Court further held it was for the employer to establish reason for the difference in pay between the workers who considered that they had been discriminated against and the comparators. The employer's justification for the difference in pay should relate to the comparators. The interests of good industrial relations might be taken into consideration in deciding whether differences between the pay of two groups of workers were due to objective factors unrelated to any discrimination on grounds of sex and were a proportional response. http://bit.ly/109TJnW