header-logo header-logo

08 September 2017 / Tessa Fry , Tessa Fry
Issue: 7760 / Categories: Opinion , Tribunals , Employment
printer mail-detail

Fall-out from Unison

Unfair should not mean unlawful, says Tessa Fry

The Supreme Court ruling that tribunal fees are unlawful is surprising given that most of the evidence was rejected in two cases before the High Court and subsequently the Court of Appeal. By contrast, the Supreme Court accepted almost all Unison’s arguments some of which were based on hypothetical examples and assumptions, rather than actual evidence ( R (on the application of Unison) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, [2017] All ER (D) 174 (Jul)).

While the Court of Appeal was sympathetic to Unison’s arguments, it did not consider the evidence provided to be a safe basis for concluding that the Fees Order was unlawful. The Supreme Court, however, ruled that the Fees Order effectively prevents access to justice and is therefore unlawful. In other words, the fees are unfair, therefore they are unlawful.

There was no dispute in either court that since the fees were introduced, the number of tribunal claims had declined substantially. However, the Court of Appeal held that figures relating to

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll