Author Topic: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful  (Read 1889 times)

Offline Mohan

  • Administrator
  • Power Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 204
  • Karma: +12/-1
    • Law Student
Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« on: July 26, 2017, 10:43:25 AM »
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40727400

Good news. It makes access to justice that little bit easier.

Judgment here: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2015-0233-judgment.pdf
« Last Edit: July 26, 2017, 10:45:05 AM by Mohan »
Mohan
Before engaging in a comments fight, make sure your English is better than your opponents'. :D

Offline Gail

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +11/-2
  • About me: Coming at law for a second time. I'm nothing if not a trier
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2017, 11:51:36 AM »
This is fantastic news for the workers.

And very timely in my case  :)

Offline Mohan

  • Administrator
  • Power Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 204
  • Karma: +12/-1
    • Law Student
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2017, 11:59:52 AM »
If you can share anything about your case Gail, keeping the parties anonymous if you prefer, maybecan all learn how you prepared your case and what it involves.
Mohan
Before engaging in a comments fight, make sure your English is better than your opponents'. :D

Offline Gail

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +11/-2
  • About me: Coming at law for a second time. I'm nothing if not a trier
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2017, 02:27:21 PM »
I'll be happy to share once I have put it together.  :)

At the moment I have a jumble of different serious breaches that need sorting into relevance and importance ready for sifting and attaching to proof collated.

It's quite a complicated mixture and need to be very careful. Will update when made sense of jumble :)

Offline Mohan

  • Administrator
  • Power Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 204
  • Karma: +12/-1
    • Law Student
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2017, 02:44:56 PM »
If I can help, feel free to ask. :)
Mohan
Before engaging in a comments fight, make sure your English is better than your opponents'. :D

Offline Captain Walker

  • Warrior for Rights!
  • Administrator
  • Divergent Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 407
  • Karma: +7/-0
    • The Captain's Watch
  • About me: LLB(Hons) 2.1 in 2006 from OU. Hobbies: addiction to Neflix and Amazon. Music: From epic stuff to head banging rock. Food Favs: Chinese, Indian, Malaysian, good steaks, Subway, KFC, Sushi. Fav Hols: Beach resorts. Fav Cars: Nissan GTR anything, Bentleys.
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2017, 03:31:21 PM »
Apols for a word of caution. Live, pending, or cases about to happen should be approached with extreme caution (in general).

Keep in mind that this forum is not 'hack-proof' or 'infiltration-proof'. Anonymised details can still be reconstructed to identify parties.

Also be aware that eventually some members of this site may not be OU related and may not hold your/our confidence/allegiances. So no hacking required to cause trouble.

It is suggested that discussion of members' cases happen outside of TLF features (meaning not even in our chatrooms), on Telephones or VOIP.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2017, 03:55:05 PM by Captain Walker »
Our democracy has been fracked.

Offline Mohan

  • Administrator
  • Power Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 204
  • Karma: +12/-1
    • Law Student
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2017, 03:38:36 PM »
Warning noted.

Although inituial contact is made here on this forum, users do have alternative like phones, and other emails (Gmail etc)
Mohan
Before engaging in a comments fight, make sure your English is better than your opponents'. :D

Offline Gail

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +11/-2
  • About me: Coming at law for a second time. I'm nothing if not a trier
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #7 on: July 26, 2017, 04:00:27 PM »
Warning noted here as well  :)

Suffice it to say.. jumble sorted through and a lot has been discarded due to being too remote and/or difficult to prove. (in my own humble opinion of course).

Now phoning relevant people to begin complaint proceedings.

Further updates will not be on this forum for the reasons Captain Walker stated. But happy to discuss updates via emails as things move along. :)

Offline David W

  • Power Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 117
  • Karma: +10/-0
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2017, 03:43:13 AM »
I would certainly agree that £1200 to bring a case before a tribunal was an outrageous amount, particularly as many of those cases would be for unfair dismissal meaning the claimants were more than likely without income when making the claim.


This does raise some wider questions - how can access to justice for all be maintained without the system collapsing under the weight of claims both deserving and less so? Who does / should / could pay for the system? Isn't it the case that access to justice generally is limited to those that can afford it (criminal justice perhaps being an exception with the taxpayer picking up most of the tab)? Is making criminals pay £1200 towards their court costs the answer - how will they pay it given they may be in jail or unable to find work due to their conviction? How many of us could afford to bring a civil action purely for the sake of vindication? Should tribunals be accessible online? Would there be confidence in an online environment? Could IBM's Watson be the answer?


Sigh - it seems I have many more questions than answers at the moment!
I dont always remember case names in EU law. But when I do it's Internationalle Handelgesellschaft mbH v Einfuhr und Vorratsstelle fur getride und Futtermittel

Offline Superfly

  • Ascendant
  • **
  • Posts: 35
  • Karma: +5/-1
  • This will keep the kids away from the fireplace.
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2017, 08:27:13 AM »
Where does the money come from to pay for the cases to bought?

I can just see all the solicitors eyes light up yesterday when this news broke, 'hitting pay dirt' springs to mind.

Also read a report that all monies that have been paid by claimants over the past three years will be reimbursed, another hit to the public purse. Think the public sector will have to wait a little longer for that pay rise.
C
Release the hounds.

Offline Captain Walker

  • Warrior for Rights!
  • Administrator
  • Divergent Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 407
  • Karma: +7/-0
    • The Captain's Watch
  • About me: LLB(Hons) 2.1 in 2006 from OU. Hobbies: addiction to Neflix and Amazon. Music: From epic stuff to head banging rock. Food Favs: Chinese, Indian, Malaysian, good steaks, Subway, KFC, Sushi. Fav Hols: Beach resorts. Fav Cars: Nissan GTR anything, Bentleys.
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2017, 08:49:19 AM »
Where does the money come from to pay for the cases to bought?

I can just see all the solicitors eyes light up yesterday when this news broke, 'hitting pay dirt' springs to mind.

Also read a report that all monies that have been paid by claimants over the past three years will be reimbursed, another hit to the public purse. Think the public sector will have to wait a little longer for that pay rise.
C

Ultimately:
1. Increased govt debt.

2. The tax payer.

3. 'Printing' money - which the BoE etc are lawfully able to do.

So it's not a problem.  ;)
Our democracy has been fracked.

Offline Superfly

  • Ascendant
  • **
  • Posts: 35
  • Karma: +5/-1
  • This will keep the kids away from the fireplace.
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2017, 09:27:45 AM »
 8) 8) 8) 8)
Release the hounds.

Offline Ryan

  • Trade unionist
  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 97
  • Karma: +16/-0
  • Starting W203 Oct 2017 (OU - Bachelor of Laws)
  • About me: LLB student, cares for disabled partner, trade unionist, holds an interest in labour law.
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #12 on: July 27, 2017, 09:35:55 PM »
Where does the money come from to pay for the cases to bought?

I can just see all the solicitors eyes light up yesterday when this news broke, 'hitting pay dirt' springs to mind.

Also read a report that all monies that have been paid by claimants over the past three years will be reimbursed, another hit to the public purse. Think the public sector will have to wait a little longer for that pay rise.
C

£32 million is a pittance is far as the annual government budget is concerned, I don't think the government is overly worried on that one.

There will be a bit of rebound for employment solicitor firms (who have been hit with redundancies since 2013) as well as the employment Bar. However this judgment will not be a total reversal of fortunes as the LASPOA 2012 restrictions on legal aid still apply - the effect of which has removed legally-aided funded claimants out of the ET.

The problem of legal representation in the ET still remains. Those who have the money to pay for legal representation, or who are members of a trade union will be fine. Additionally some litigants-in-person who are legal nerds may also be able to handle their own in ET. However it is everyone else who will be in difficulty as the way that the ET has developed has made it hostile to the litigant-in-person. The reason is that the ET has become more procedural and legalistic than the industrial tribunals of the 1970s.

When I was studying W101 in 2014/15 I went to view an ET case in Ashford and saw a litigant-in-person (LIP) get chewed up and spat out by the employment judge and the employer's barrister. The LIP hadn't followed the Procedural Rules where he needed to put in a witness statement for himself and because he didn't he couldn't offer oral testimony. His attempts to cross-examine the employer's witnesses were cut down by the judge, as the claimant wrongly believed the ET was there to rehear the evidence heard in the disciplinary hearing where he was sacked. The LIP didn't appreciate that there is a specific legal test for unfair dismissal to be argued and because of this he could not argue his case. The employment judge lost his temper with the claimant several times which unnerved him greatly.

After the ET hearing had finished I approached the claimant and struck up a conversation with him. He cashed in his ISA and paid the tribunal fees, but he wasn't a trade union member and he couldn't afford legal representation. He gave me his contact details and later he told me over the telephone that he lost and he been made to pay some of the employer's costs. It was quite sad really.

Access to legal representation would have made the difference to him. It either would have rendered his case in a format which can be argued at ET, or a solicitor could have shown him that he didn't have a case and that he needn't pursue it.
I expect everyone to apologise underneath this post, by the end of the following four days.

Offline Superfly

  • Ascendant
  • **
  • Posts: 35
  • Karma: +5/-1
  • This will keep the kids away from the fireplace.
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #13 on: July 27, 2017, 10:14:00 PM »
£32 mill may well be a pittance, but still has to be found. More debt that will passed onto my kids, as well as the additional costs associated with more ET cases, so who knows what the final bill will be year on year.
C

Release the hounds.

Offline Gail

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 69
  • Karma: +11/-2
  • About me: Coming at law for a second time. I'm nothing if not a trier
Re: Supreme Court says fees for Employment Tribunals unlawful
« Reply #14 on: July 27, 2017, 10:34:08 PM »
Well, we CAN ask the government to collect the taxes that the rich people and the massive corporations dodge year on year. Google, Amazon, Facebook etc pay hardly any tax at all when collectively they actually owe trillions.

The government made a deal with Google last year. Google owed over 40 billion in taxes and got away with paying only something like 10 million.

But the government have no problem jailing or bankrupting the ordinary man for owing less then 3k.

Maybe the people worried about the ET ruling and how the future will look should focus on scandalous things like the above instead of blaming the poor workers who are out to 'get something for nothing' (direct quote from some rich business owner whose name I forgot)
« Last Edit: July 27, 2017, 10:38:58 PM by Gail »