header-logo header-logo

29 July 2013
Issue: 7571 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Courts will review £1,200 employee fees

Unison wins permission to challenge employment tribunal fees

The High Court has given Unison, the trade union, permission to bring a judicial review challenging the introduction of employment tribunal fees.

The hearing is due to take place in October. Unison succeeded at an oral hearing in the High Court this week, although its paper application failed. However, the court rejected its application for an injunction to prevent the fees coming into force.

As of this week, employees and ex-employees will need to pay £160–£250 to issue a claim, and a hearing fee of £230–£950. Groups issuing a claim will pay higher fees of £320–£1,500 to issue claims and £460–£5,700 for a hearing.

The lower range of fees will apply to simpler cases such as wages claims, while the higher fees will apply to unfair dismissal and discrimination cases.

Previously, claimants did not pay fees.

In its legal challenge, Unison will argue that:

  • the fees are prohibitively expensive, and the national courts have a duty under EU law not to make it excessively difficult to exercise individual rights;
  • fees are not payable in most tribunal claims therefore it breaches the principle of equivalence;
  • there has been no proper assessment of the public sector equality duty; and
  • the fees will have a disproportionate impact on women.

Remissions will be granted in certain circumstances. An unmarried claimant with no children will not qualify if they are earning over £13,000. A married person with four children will be ineligible if the combined household income exceeds £29,000.

Employment law barrister Elizabeth George, of Leigh Day & Co said employers “will be less inclined to abide by their legal obligations as the risk of being challenged will be much reduced”.

However, justice minister Helen Grant said it was important to reduce the financial burden of the £74m employment tribunal system.

Issue: 7571 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll