header-logo header-logo

Employment fees—what happens now?

04 August 2017
Issue: 7757 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
printer mail-detail

The Supreme Court’s high-profile decision that employment tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal fees are illegal is ‘a masterpiece of judicial analysis of the constitutional right of access to justice’.

Writing in NLJ, Chris Bryden, 4 King’s Bench Walk, and Michael Salter, Ely Place Chambers, laud the ruling, in R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51. The response, in some quarters, condemning the decision for opening the floodgates to unmeritorious claims ‘is comprehensively debunked by a glancing familiarity with the judgment itself,’ say Bryden and Salter.

‘This demonstrates that the statistics do not bear out the argument that weak unmeritorious claims were weeded out by the fees. The success rate of tribunal claims barely shifted at all despite the (almost) 80% reduction in claims brought; if the argument that fees deterred weak claims was sustainable then the percentage success rate should have increased dramatically.’

However, the implications of the judgment, in terms of repaying fees paid by litigants, may be complicated to sort out. In the longer term, moreover, the funding of the tribunal system will have to be addressed. See `Supreme Court gives tribunal fees the push' in this week's issue.

Issue: 7757 / Categories: Legal News , Employment
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
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
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll