header-logo header-logo

13 May 2010
Issue: 7417 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Union redundancy victory

The government acted unlawfully when it introduced a new civil service redundancy scheme without consulting trade unions, the high court has ruled.

The Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) launched a judicial review after the government revised the Civil Service Compensation Scheme (CSCS) with a view to saving £500m over three years. The changes, which affected payments and pensions, were due to come into force on 1 April 2010.

Delivering judgment in R (on the application of PCS) v Minister for the Civil Service, Sales J quashed the amended CSCS on the grounds the government failed to obtain the union’s consent, as required by the Superannuation Act 1972, s 2(3).

The PCS claimed the amendments deprived its members of accrued rights in respect of redundancy and early retirement. Its members took industrial action.

The background to the changes, Sales J said, was the “growing cost of pension provision as life expectation increases...constraints upon the public finances in current circumstances and a desire on the part of the government to reduce the costs of redundancy through restructuring of government departments”.

Richard Arthur, head of trade union law at Thompsons Solicitors, says: “The law says that the government can’t change redundancy rights which have already accrued for civil servants unless the unions agree...PCS did not agree to the new scheme and so it was found to be unlawful.”
 

Issue: 7417 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Laytons ETL—Maximilian Kraitt

Commercial firm strengthens real estate disputes team with associate hire

Switalskis—three appointments

Switalskis—three appointments

Firm appoints three directors to board

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Browne Jacobson—seven promotions

Six promoted to partner and one to legal director across UK and Ireland offices

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll