R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor
R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor | |
---|---|
Court | UK Supreme Court |
Full case name | R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor |
Decided | 26 July 2017 |
Citation | [2017] UKSC 51 |
Case history | |
Appealed from | Divisional Court of the Administrative Court [2014] EWHC 218 (Admin); Divisional Court of the Administrative Court [2014] EWHC 4198 (Admin); Court of Appeal of England and Wales [2015] EWCA Civ 935 |
Court membership | |
Judges sitting | Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes |
Case opinions | |
| |
Concurrence |
|
Keywords | |
Rule of law, Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013, Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, judicial review |
R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51 is a UK labour law and UK constitutional law judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. It held that fees for employment tribunals are unlawful because they impede access to justice, and defy the rule of law.[1]
Facts
[edit]Unison claimed that fees for employment tribunals were ultra vires. The UK government introduced £1,200 fees to bring a typical case to an employment tribunal through the Employment Tribunals and the Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 (SI 2013/1893).
The Lord Chancellor purported to exercise this power under section 42(1) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. Unison claimed that the order was ultra vires.
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (August 2017) |
Judgment
[edit]The Supreme Court unanimously held that employment tribunal fees were unlawful.
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (August 2017) |
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]References
[edit]- E McGaughey, A Casebook on Labour Law (Hart 2019) ch 3, 149