‘Navid Pourghazi considers the recent decision in Gillett v Bridge 86 Ltd (UKEAT/0015/17/DM) where the EAT overturned a refusal of an in-time application to amend a claim form and provided helpful guidance on how Tribunals should deal with such applications in the future. A copy of the judgment is available here.’
Cloisters, 27th July 2017
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘As long ago as 1974 a benevolent approach to the assessment of the merits of a case was adopted in the Employment Tribunal (ET). Sir High Griffiths sitting in the NIRC, when addressing an application for costs, stated the following:
“Ordinary experience of life frequently teaches us that that which is plain for all to see once the dust of battle has subsided was far from clear to the combatants when they took up arms. We do not therefore attach undue weight to the fact that at the end of a skilful cross-examination on the last day of the hearing the employee was forced to concede that in the circumstances as they had emerged the employers had acted reasonably in dismissing him.”
(E. T. Marler Ltd v Robertson [1974] ICR 72.)’
Littleton Chambers, 25th July 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘Nathaniel Caiden considers the recent Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) judgment in Dudley MBC v Willetts UKEAT/0334/16/JOJ that concerns the inclusion of voluntary overtime normally worked in calculating holiday pay.’
Cloisters, 1st August 2017
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘Caspar Glyn QC, Schona Jolly QC and Sian McKinley consider the implications of today’s seismic decision from the Supreme Court which ruled that ET fees are unlawful: R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51.’
Cloisters, 26th July 2017
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘The Supreme Court have, this morning, handed down Judgment in the case of R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, more commonly known as ‘the appeal against Employment Tribunal fees’.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 26th July 2017
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘Prior to today’s decision of the Supreme Court the score read Her Majesty’s Government 2: UNISON 0 in the efforts of the union to overturn the Employment Tribunal fees regime which has been in place since July 2013.’
Littleton Chambers, 26th July 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘The amount of a costs order in the employment tribunal (ET) can be made subject to detailed assessment, to be carried out (either by the ET or by a county court) in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR) (rule 78, ET Rules). It was traditionally understood that this application of the CPR to ET procedure was limited to the assessment of the level of costs, as opposed to the separate question of whether costs should be ordered at all. As reflected in the CPR, “costs follow the event” in the civil courts. In contrast, the ET has a limited costs jurisdiction, which depends on the existence of improper or unreasonable conduct and the exercise of discretion in the presence of such conduct as to whether to award costs.’
Littleton Chambers, 24th July 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘The Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) will soon announce an “administrative” solution to claims arising from the Supreme Court’s ruling last month that the current fees regime is unlawful, it has emerged.’
Litigation Futures, 21st August 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The president of employment tribunals in England and Wales, Judge Brian Doyle, has issued a case management order staying claims brought on the basis of the Supreme Court’s ruling last month that the current fees regime is unlawful.’
Litigation Futures, 10th August 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council has lost a case at the Employment Appeal Tribunal over how voluntarily-worked overtime is treated in the calculation of holiday pay.’
Local Government Lawyer, 3rd August 2017
Source: localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Judge rules cycle courier should have been treated as employed worker with rights to holiday pay and the minimum wage.’
The Guardian, 2nd August 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A Christian magistrate who lost his job and then his role as an NHS director for speaking out against adoption by same-sex parents will this week sue NHS bosses claiming political correctness can prevent Christians holding public posts.’
Daily Telegraph, 30th July 2017
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘In R(on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51, the Supreme Court gave an important judgment regarding the importance of access of justice. The Supreme Court held that the fees imposed by the Lord Chancellor in employment tribunal and employment appeal tribunal cases were unlawful.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 27th July 2017
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘On Wednesday the UK Supreme Court ruled court fees for claims before employment tribunals, introduced by the coalition government in 2013, to be illegal. Christina Lienen argues that this judgement is likely to join the ranks of landmark constitutional decisions, given its characterisation of the UK constitution as founded in common law and therefore in the hands of judges rather than politicians.’
UCL Constitution Unit, 28th July 2017
Source: constitution-unit.com
‘The Supreme Court has ruled that workplace tribunal fees are unlawful, forcing the Government to repay more than £27m paid by employees for cases around unfair dismal, discrimination and other workplace issues since July 2013.’
The Independent, 26th July 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘An employment tribunal has upheld a former monitoring officer’s claim of victimisation and unfair dismissal by a borough council.’
Local Government Lawyer, 25th July 2017
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘Government officials should look at reducing the cost of employment tribunal fees, according to Matthew Taylor, who today publishes a long-awaited review into employment rights of workers in the gig economy.’
The Independent, 11th July 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Nicholas Siddall analyses the recent judgment of the EAT in Swissport v Exley & Ors [2017] UKEAT/007/16 (Slade J) in which he successfully appeared and the interesting observations therein made by the EAT as to the correct approach to assessing costs in the Employment Tribunal.’
Littleton Chambers, 30th June 2017
Source: www.littletonchambers.com
‘The David Hare screenplay for the recent film Denial contains the following advice to the client: ‘stay seated, button your lip, and win.’ This article seeks to plot a path for advocates to winning in large scale discrimination claims in the employment tribunal, based on the writer’s long experience of the ET and, more recently, briefs to act for the respondents in two high stakes cases, AB -v- A Chief Constable[i] and Aubrey -v- The Chief Constable of Northumbria Police[ii]. The suggested lessons apply to all types of large-scale claim in the ET.’
UK Police Law Blog, 27th June 2017
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
‘The David Hare screenplay for the recent film Denial contains the following advice to the client: “stay seated, button your lip, and win.” This article seeks to plot a path for advocates to winning in large scale discrimination claims in the employment tribunal, based on the writer’s long experience of the ET and, more recently, briefs to act for the respondents in two high stakes cases, AB -v- A Chief Constable[i] and Aubrey -v- The Chief Constable of Northumbria Police[ii]. The suggested lessons apply to all types of large-scale claim in the ET.’
UK Police Law Blog, 27th June 2017
Source: ukpolicelawblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025