header-logo header-logo

Overhaul for tribunals?

11 September 2015
Issue: 7667 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Law Society issues employment proposals amid fee controversy

The Law Society has proposed an overhaul of the employment tribunal structure, amid mounting disquiet over the impact of fees on potential claimants.

The number of disputes proceeding to tribunal has dropped by 60% since the introduction of fees, prompting widespread concern that potential claimants can’t afford fees of up to £1,200. The Ministry of Justice is currently reviewing their impact.

This week, the Law Society proposed a new tribunal structure for employment claims, where: claims are dealt with flexibly; disputes are dealt with in a single jurisdiction consisting of four levels; simple cases, such as handling unpaid wages claims, are dealt with on a paper basis in level one; and more complex cases, such as multi-strand discrimination cases, are heard by an experienced judge in level four.

Law Society President Jonathan Smithers says: “Our proposed system would be easy for the public to use, as there would be a single entry point, and make sure that cases are dealt with in the most appropriate way.

The Court of Appeal has rejected a challenge by Unison against the legality of the fees (R (oao Unison) v Lord Chancellor [2015] EWCA Civ 935). Last week, the Scottish government pledged to scrap the fees.

Writing in NLJ this week, Stephen Levinson, consultant solicitor, Keystone Law, discusses the impact of tribunal fees, noting that, in a recent Employment Law Association survey of its members, more than one third said legal expenses insurance was an increasingly important factor in whether a legal claim proceeds. He writes that the insurance market may respond to this in due course, and union membership could also provide a cheap form of legal insurance.

Issue: 7667 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll