The Respondent decided not to award so-called incremental pay increases to their employees. Several hundred affected employees (covering five groups, but now three as far as these proceedings relate) brought proceedings in the ET for unlawful deduction of wages under Part II of the ERA 1996, on the basis that they had a contractual entitlement to such increases. The ET dismissed the claims in their entirety; the EAT allowed the appeal in relation to one group of Claimants and dismissed it in relation to the other two groups. The Respondent appealed and the two groups of Claimants cross-appealed.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal but allowed the cross-appeal, resulting in all of the Claimants being entitled to arrears of pay equivalent to what they would have earned if pay progression had been operated in each of the years in which it was frozen.