Based on these court precedents, we can derive the following principles:
1. If there are differences in wages between similarly situated male and female workers and if the company cannot provide a reasonable justification for such difference, the court will find unlawful discrimination, as in the Akita Sogo and Ishizaki Honten cases.
2. If the court finds unlawful discrimination and there is a clear wage table or standard on which the court can rely, then court will likely utilize LSL Articles 4 and 13 to apply the male workers' table to the female workers to compensate for the wage gap, as in the Akita Sogo, Nihon Tekko Renmei, Sanyo Bussan and Iwate Bank cases.
3. If, however, there is no clear standard or table on which the court can rely, but there is unlawful discrimination, the company will be held liable based on Civil Code Article 709 tort theory and the female workers will be compensated as in the Nisso Tosho and Ishizaki Honten cases.
4. If a wage difference results from a delay in promotion, initially, courts refused to confirm the promoted position of the female worker, on the ground that promotion was a company decision. However, now there is the Shiba case. Thus, for wage purposes, the court can determine the appropriate position of the employee, although for the purpose of job responsibility and actual promotion, the courts still maintain that this is a company decision.
