The Lawyer Asia Pacific 150 is the only research report to provide a ranking of the top 100 independent local firms and top 50 global firms in the region. The report offers critical review of some of the fastest growing firms and their strategies, a country-by-country guide to leading legal advisers and legal services market trends, plus exclusive insight into the current business development opportunities in the Asia Pacific. Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
Material difference other than sex justifying unequal pay
British Coal Corporation v Smith & ors (1996).
HL (Lords Keith, Browne-Wilkinson, Slynn, Steyn and Hoffmann) 22/5/96.
Summary: Employer fails to discharge burden of proof that difference in pay between men and women employees was not because of the difference in sex.
Appeal by British Coal Corporation against CA decision (28/4/94) dismissing its appeal against the EAT decision which allowed an appeal by 1,286 women workers against a ruling that there was no material difference under s.1 (3) Equal Pay Act 1970 to justify a difference between their pay and that of male workers in equivalent work and cross-appeal by the respondents as to s.1 (3) against the decision that they could not rely on a comparison with a clerical worker.