header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

A new route for striking workers?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. 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
Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Employment law team strengthened with partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

Corporate solicitor joins as partner in Birmingham

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Alarm bells over Mazur
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Jury trial & a constitutional illusion
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
NLJ this week: The rise—and risks—of going private
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
NLJ this week: Human rights disputes push courts to redefine their role
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Debarment orders—shortcut or minefield?
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll