header-logo header-logo

Courts will review £1,200 employee fees

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

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

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Is a suspect’s state of mind a ‘fact’ capable of triggering adverse inferences? Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Smith of Corker Binning examines how R v Leslie reshapes the debate
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
back-to-top-scroll