header-logo header-logo

18 February 2021 / John Bowers KC
Issue: 7921 / Categories: Features , In Court , Tribunals , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment tribunals: A one stop shop?

39803
Is an employment tribunal a court & does it matter, asks John Bowers QC
  • Irwell v Watson; tribunals as a one stop shop.

Employment tribunals (ETs) were intended, when first introduced in 1963, to be easily accessible, simple and straightforward, but have gradually taken on more of the appearance of courts. There was a somewhat naive belief in the beginning that justice in such tribunals could be achieved without the parties needing lawyers. The presiding officer was called a chair, but is now a judge. And tribunals of course now deal with cases of great complexity, recondite legal areas and with millions at stake. A continuing fundamental difference from a court however, is that the tribunal has no inherent jurisdiction but only what the dizzying array of statutes provide them.

There may be several reasons why this is important. That may be for the purposes of contempt of court as in AG v BBC [1978] 1 WLR 477, [1978] 2 All ER 731. In Peach

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

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers—Sophie Barrett-Brown

Withers drives further growth in its UK immigration team with new partner Sophie Barrett-Brown

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal—Esther Amoako

Venus Legal invests in next generation of legal talent as specialist litigation practice grows

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips—Catrina Smith

Fisher Phillips continues momentum in London with arrival of Catrina Smith

NEWS
Restrictions on workplace non-disclosure agreements could make settlements slower, more complex and more expensive when reforms expected in 2027 take effect
Private prosecutors face closer scrutiny under Crown Prosecution Service guidance designed to strengthen accountability and consistency when intervention is requested
Foreign states cannot necessarily claim immunity for cyber operations launched abroad against computers in Britain, following a divided Supreme Court ruling
Defendants who make unsupported complaints about their lawyers risk losing legal aid while confiscation proceedings continue without representation
Lawyers advising Russian clients face different sanctions restrictions across the UK, EU and US, despite their shared objective of increasing pressure on Russia
back-to-top-scroll