header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

A new route for striking workers?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
07 March 2025 / Charles Pigott
Issue: 8107 / Categories: Features , Employment , Disciplinary&grievance procedures
printer mail-detail
210366
Could a recent ruling plug the gap in remedies for trade union detriment claims? Charles Pigott considers the scope of the Blacklisting Regulations
  • The Court of Appeal ruling in Morais and others v Ryanair DAC [2025] EWCA Civ 19 has opened a way for striking workers who have been subject to detrimental treatment because of their participation in official industrial action to recover compensation from their employers.

The Court of Appeal’s ruling in Morais and others v Ryanair DAC [2025] EWCA Civ 19 has revealed a new legal route for trade union detriment claims based on the Employment Relations Act 1999 (Blacklists) Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/493) (the Blacklisting Regulations).

Since last year’s Supreme Court ruling in Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Mercer [2024] UKSC 12, it has been clear that workers who have taken part in industrial action are not protected from detriment under s 146, Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA 1992). Separate TULRCA 1992 provisions apply to protect workers

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Winckworth Sherwood—Arcangelo D’Apolito

Winckworth Sherwood—Arcangelo D’Apolito

Private wealth and tax offering boosted by dual qualified partner hire

Sackers—John Card

Sackers—John Card

Pensions firm announces hire in project management team

Myers & Co—Kerry Boyle

Myers & Co—Kerry Boyle

Staffordshire firm appoints head of commercial property

NEWS
Read All
Legal notice: Notice under the Trustee Act 1925
NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925 
HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)
NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Emergency lawyers on call as international regulatory actions soar
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
NLJ this week: Employment law’s fine margins
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
NLJ this week: Promises broken on non-molestation orders?
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
NLJ this week: Assisted dying under the legal microscope
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll