Lord Irvine should be applauded for putting his �22,000 pay rise on hold pending a review, Chancellor Gordon Brown has said.

Mr Brown said he believed a legal "anomaly" which means the Lord Chancellor must be paid more than the UK's most senior judge must be amended.

The Lord Chancellor's department has announced that instead of the 12.6% increase, Lord Irvine has asked that his pay be increased by the same amount as fellow cabinet members - a rise of 2.25%.

The move follows outrage expressed by MPs and union leaders.

In the same pay deal, teachers and other public sector workers were given rises of at or near inflation levels.

There has obviously been some influence placed on him - who else would Lord Irvine talk to on a Saturday than Tony Blair? Ian Gibson MP

As head of the judiciary, Lord Irvine's salary is linked to that of judges, while the pay of other ministers and MPs is tied to senior civil servants.

Labour MP Ian Gibson - who had earlier said he and other backbenchers would be protesting in the Commons about the increase - said he was delighted by the move.

"This is wonderful news. He has obviously got some intelligence," the MP for Norwich North said.

"There has obviously been some influence placed on him. Who else would Lord Irvine talk to on a Saturday than Tony Blair?"

Applaud

Shadow chancellor Michael Howard described the move as a "humiliating u-turn".

"Yes it's the right thing not to take it, but my goodness what a humiliation for him after saying for so long he would take it," he told Sky's Sunday With Adam Boulton.

People should applaud him for not taking that rise that in statute he was entitled to have Gordon Brown

Mr Brown, speaking on BBC One's Breakfast with Frost, denied reports that he had stepped in to block Lord Irvine's pay increase.

He said the Lord Chancellor had himself decided not take the pay increase while the review takes place.

"People should applaud him for not taking that rise that in statute he was entitled to have," said Mr Brown.

He said the system needed changing in order to avoid a repeat of the saga over Lord Irvine's pay.

"This cannot happen in the same way again and I believe this will be sorted out in the next few months," he said.

Pressure

But opposition MPs were sceptical about the motives behind Lord Irvine's decision not to take the pay increase.

Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman Matthew Taylor said: "It shouldn't have to take such public pressure to persuade a senior Labour politician not to accept such an excessive pay rise.

It seems that Lord Irvine was shamed into this move through the negative press reaction John Edmonds, GMB union

"This decision appears to be more about spin than any real understanding of how inappropriate such a pay rise was in the first place."

Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith welcomed Lord Irvine's decision, saying it was the sort of U-turn the government should make more often.

John Edmonds, general secretary of the GMB union, said low-paid public sector workers would not be impressed by the gesture, which he said Lord Irvine had been "shamed into".

Labour MPs had threatened revolt over the rise

In cash terms Lord Irvine - whose salary would have risen to �202,736 from 1 April this year - would have received a rise 50 times higher than the �467 increase of an Army private.

Following his latest decision his pay will increase from �180,045 to �184,096.

The 12.6% pay rise had been calculated as part of an ancient pay structure, which means the Lord Chancellor always receives an annual salary higher than the Lord Chief Justice.

It would have meant the pair getting a 2.75% increase which was awarded to all judges, plus another 4.4% all judges will receive from April as the final stage of last year's award.

The two men were also in line to receive a further �10,000 as a one-off.

The chancellor's department has asked the Senior Salaries Review Body (SSRB) to review the relationship between judicial salaries and those of the senior civil service.

Lord Irvine faced criticism earlier this month over revelations that his pension package from the stage will be worth �2m when he retires, added to any private pensions from his career as a barrister.