Case 1804904/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Kennedy v Spooner Industries Limited and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 1804904/2021
- Decision date
- 8 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cox Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mrs S Kennedy
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a stage 1 equal value hearing in Leeds on 6 to 8 December 2022, Employment Judge Cox dealt with Mrs S Kennedy's equal pay claims against Spooner Industries Limited and Aegeus Industries Limited. The claim against the Second Respondent was dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant.
On the remaining comparators, the Respondent succeeded on its material factor defence by reference to market rate in relation to Mr Lewis-Jones and Mr Cassingham, so those claims were dismissed. It also succeeded in relation to Mr Rankin only to the extent of the difference between the Claimant's salary and £80,000 from 17 January 2019 to June 2019, £82,000 from July 2019 to June 2020, and £83,640 from July 2020; the claim for those differences was dismissed.
The same defence succeeded in relation to Mr Proctor for the period from 17 January 2019 to 5 January 2020 only, and the claim for that period was dismissed. The defence failed in relation to Mr Bentley and Mr Marson. The judgment records no monetary award and resolves the stage 1 equal value issues only.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equal pay | The claim against the Second Respondent was dismissed on withdrawal by the Claimant. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Equal pay | The Respondent's defence of material factor by reference to market rate succeeded in relation to Mr Lewis-Jones and Mr Cassingham, and the claim in relation to those comparators was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Equal pay | The Respondent's defence of material factor by reference to market rate succeeded in relation to Mr Rankin only to the extent of the difference between the Claimant's salary and £80,000 from 17 January 2019 to June 2019, £82,000 from July 2019 to June 2020 and £83,640 from July 2020; the claim for those differences was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Equal pay | The Respondent's defence of material factor by reference to market rate succeeded in relation to Mr Proctor for the period from 17 January 2019 to 5 January 2020 only; the claim for that period was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Equal pay | The Respondent's defence of material factor by reference to market rate failed in relation to Mr Bentley. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- material factor defence by reference to market rate
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.