Employment Law in UK Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Employment Law in UK - Case Study Example Since, the European law prevails over the domestic law, the domestic courts and tribunals have to apply relevant principles of the European law, which in this context refers to the EC Treaty and directives2. Sometimes, a court or tribunal directly applies the European law and sometimes, where there seems to be a conflict between domestic and European law, the European Court of Justice or the ECJ is asked to decide on the correct interpretation of the law. The ECJ's objective is to ensure the uniform interpretation and effective application of European law. In case of a conflict between domestic legislation and European law, an important consideration is whether the law concerned has direct effect in the UK. Article 141 of the EC Treaty3 has direct effect between private citizens or the horizontal effect and between private citizens and the state or the vertical effect. As per the provisions of the European Communities Act 1972, the European Community law forms part of UK domestic law. ... In respect of appellant claims, Section 2(4) of the 1970 Act is relevant and in order to be admissible in an employment tribunal, these claims have to be filed within the statutory time limit. In such cases the employment tribunal is empowered to grant a successful applicant the right to retrospective access to the scheme, subject to the payment of appropriate contributions, wherever the periods of employment were not earlier than the 8th of April 1976. The significance of this date is that from this date direct effect was given to the judgment of the European Court of Justice in Defrenne v Sabena6 and in this case the court held that article 119 of the EC Treaty7 provided for equal treatment in the right to join an occupational pension scheme. In Alabaster -v- Barclays Bank Plc8 Mrs. Alabaster pleaded that her employer's failure to incorporate her pay rise into her SMP was contrary to the Equal Pay Act 1970 and Article 141 of the EC Treaty. The ECJ ruled in her favour and held that there was a breach of EU law, resulting in the UK Government amending the SMP rules. The Employment Appeal Tribunal or EAT has ruled that the Equal Pay Act 1970 is not infringed by a pay system wherein employees with more service and experience were paid more than those with lesser service and experience even though most of the latter are female and most of the former are male. The argument that the ECJ decision in Nimz v Frie und Hansestadt Hamburg9 is not good law because of Handels- og Kontorfunktionrernes Forbund I Danmark v Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening10, is untenable, because the first case was concerned with part time employees whereas the