Paying enhanced adoption pay alongside lower shared parental pay is not direct discrimination (Price v Powys County Council)

Where an employer pays adoption pay at an enhanced rate but pays shared parental pay to all employees (male or female) at a lower rate (e.g., at the statutory rate), that will not amount to direct sex discrimination, according to the EAT.

Price v Powys County Council (UKEAT/0133/20/LA)

What are the practical implications of this judgment?

We already knew from the Court of Appeal’s judgment in Capita Customer Management v Ali that an employer that pays maternity pay at an enhanced rate but pays shared parental pay to all employees (male or female) at the statutory rate does not discriminate directly because of sex.

In this case, the EAT effectively extends that principle to cover the situation where an employer pays adoption pay at an enhanced rate but pays shared parental pay to all employees (male or female) at the statutory rate: that will not amount to direct sex discrimination either.

The reasoning to support this conclusion is very similar to that of the Court of Appeal in Capita Customer Management v Ali (indeed that case is referred to considerably in this judgment). In summary:

  • the underlying predominant purpose of adoption leave and shared parental leave are not the same. Although they both facilitate childcare, the purpose of adoption leave extends well beyond that purpose
  • it follows that where a male claimant taking shared parental leave (who is receiving only the statutory rate of shared parental pay) seeks to compare himself, in a claim of direct sex discrimination, to a female fellow-employee who takes adoption leave (who is receiving an enhanced rate of adoption pay under her employer’s policy), that woman will not be a valid comparator because there are ‘material differences’ between the claimant and her, on account of the different purposes of the two types of leave in question

This judgment will give succour to employers who have been operating enhanced pay for those on adoption, but only providing a lower rate (e.g., the statutory rate) to any employee (male or female) taking shared parental leave. Such differential policies may continue without any concern that they may give rise to direct sex discrimination claims.

Case details

  • Court: Employment Appeal Tribunal
  • Judge: Choudhury P, Ms K Bilgan, Miss S M Wilson CBE
  • Date of judgment: 31 March 2021

Contact Us

Please contact us for a free, initial telephone consultation with a barrister.

020 7459 4619

    Contact Us





    Latest News

    FCA issues policy statement with guidance on non-financial misconduct

    The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published Policy statement PS25/23: Tackling non‑financial misconduct in financial services, following amendment of the Code of Conduct (COCON) and the Fit and Proper test for Employees and Senior Personnel (FIT) sourcebooks. The policy statement contains final guidance on serious non-financial misconduct (NFM) in the financial services sector, and aims… >>

    19 December 2025

    Employment Tribunals launch 18 explainer videos for unrepresented parties

    The President of Employment Tribunals (England & Wales), Judge Barry Clarke, has announced the launch of 18 explainer videos on YouTube aimed at improving access to justice by clarifying tribunal procedures and complex employment law for unrepresented parties. The initiative also seeks to help litigants present focused claims and responses, reducing case management time. This… >>

    12 December 2025

    Non-binary NHS worker loses claim over misgendering

    In Lockwood v Cheshire and Wirral NHS Foundation Trust (ET case numbers: 2401211/2024, 2407178/2024), an employment tribunal has rejected a non-binary National Health Service (NHS) worker’s complaint over repeated misgendering at work, ruling that protections under equality laws did not apply. Judge Nicky Benson ruled that Haech Lockwood, a Cheshire and Wirral NHS Foundation Trust… >>

    5 December 2025