‘The latest hearing in the UK’s largest ever private sector equal pay claim is due to kick off on Wednesday, in a case that could eventually see around 15,000 predominantly female Asda workers recovering well over £100m in pay.’
The Independent, 10th October 2017
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Alex Hawley reflects on the rise in anti-austerity sentiment & the possible impact of the Unison judgment on civil court fees.’
New Law Journal, 15th September 2017
Source: www.newlawjournal.co.uk
‘Drivers for London-based minicab company Addison Lee could be owed wages and holiday pay after an employment tribunal test case found that some had been wrongly classed as self-employed.’
The Guardian, 25th September 2017
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A paralegal employed by a personal injury firm under an oral contract was entitled to a bonus payment worth almost £14,000, an employment tribunal has ruled.’
Legal Futures, 5th September 2017
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘A litigant in person who “abruptly” walked out of a detailed assessment hearing before the end of the first day and failed to return, has been ordered to pay £82,930 by an employment judge.’
Litigation Futures, 4th September 2017
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘A short stay on employment tribunal claims brought “in reliance upon” the Supreme Court’s recent finding that the fee regime introduced in 2013 was unlawful has been lifted by the tribunal service.’
OUT-LAW.com, 24th August 2017
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Almost everyone has an immediate intuitive understanding of direct discrimination. That is not to say that there are no difficult cases, but the core concept is easily grasped. Imagine an employer with an express policy of refusing to employ women. In a case of that sort the discrimination is obvious. To use the language of Equality Act 2010, s. 13, the employer treats women less favourably because of their sex. The reason for the simplicity of direct discrimination is that it usually needs no context for the discriminatory impact of the criterion to be apparent. The criterion is inherently discriminatory.’
11KBW, 10th August 2017
Source: www.11kbw.com
‘The Supreme Court today [30 July] allowed UNISON’s appeal and held that fees imposed in respect of proceedings in employment tribunals and the Employment Appeal Tribunal are unlawful because of their effects on access to justice.’
Blackstone Chambers, 30th July 2017
Source: www.blackstonechambers.com
‘The Court of Appeal has today given important guidance on how to assess compensation in cases where a claimant’s injury has multiple causes. The decision will be of particular relevance to cases where an employer’s conduct acts in conjunction with other factors to cause psychiatric harm, such as stress at work or depression, to a vulnerable employee.’
Blackstone Chambers, 31st July 2017
Source: www.blackstonechambers.com
‘In an important decision on the correct interpretation of the burden of proof provisions in the Equality Act 2010, Efobi v Royal Mail, Tom Coghlin and Navid Pourghazi successfully appealed against an employment tribunal’s decision to dismiss a claimant’s race discrimination complaints.’
Cloisters, 14th August 2017
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘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
© Inner Temple Library 2025