header-logo header-logo

Tribunal fees: back from the dead?

17 May 2024 / Catrina Smith
Issue: 8071 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail
172558
The government is seeking to resurrect tribunal fees, posing serious questions about access to justice. The benefits are unclear, writes Catrina Smith
  • Proposals to introduce a fee for claimants in the employment tribunal and the Employment Appeal Tribunal raise access to justice issues, and the government has acknowledged that the fee scheme will cost more to administer and implement than it will raise.
  • If enacted in their current form, the proposals could be found to be unlawful.

The government has announced proposals to introduce a fee for claimants in the employment tribunal (ET) and the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). However, if enacted in their current form, they could suffer the same fate as the previous fees regime and be quashed as being unlawful.

The earlier fees regime was in place between 2013 and 2017 under the Employment Tribunals and the Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 (SI 2013/1893), which introduced fees of between £160 and £1,600. The introduction of fees resulted in a significant drop—nearly 70%—in the number

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

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