Cases1302374/2015

Claimant v Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd

28 February 2025Before Employment Judge CampBirminghamin person

Outcome

Claimant succeeds

Individual claims

Equal Pay(sex)not determined

This preliminary hearing determined only procedural issues under rules 6 and 9 concerning whether claim forms were properly presented. The substantive equal pay claims were not adjudicated. The tribunal decided all irregularities should be waived and no claims struck out, allowing the equal pay claims to proceed.

Facts

Over 2,000 claimants, mostly women working in various roles in Sainsbury's supermarkets, brought equal pay claims comparing themselves to male distribution centre workers. The respondents argued that many claim forms breached rule 9 of the 2013 ET Rules by wrongly including multiple claimants whose claims were not based on the same set of facts, and sought to have the irregular claims struck out. The procedural dispute had already been to the EAT and Court of Appeal. This preliminary hearing dealt with 121 claimants in 22 claim forms remitted by the Court of Appeal.

Decision

Employment Judge Camp held that the disputed claim forms were indeed presented in breach of rule 9 and were irregular, but that it would be contrary to the overriding objective to strike them out. All irregularities were waived. The breaches were not deliberate, a fair trial remained possible, and the balance of prejudice favoured the claimants. The respondents' costs application was also refused.

Practical note

Even where multiple equal pay claims are irregularly presented in breach of rule 9, tribunals retain discretion under rule 6 to waive irregularities where breaches are inadvertent, no significant prejudice results, and striking out would be disproportionate and contrary to the overriding objective.

Legal authorities cited

R (Unison) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51Weir Valves & Controls (UK) Ltd v Armitage [2004] ICR 371Blockbuster Entertainment Limited v James [2006] EWCA Civ 684Farmah & Others v Birmingham City Council [2018] ICR 921Brierley & Ors v ASDA Stores Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 8

Statutes

Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 - Rule 37Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 - Rule 6Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 - Rule 9

Case details

Case number
1302374/2015
Decision date
28 February 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
2
Classification
contested

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister

Employment details

Role
Customer Service Assistants, General Assistants, Team Leaders (various departments)

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
barrister