||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 178 (Dec)
|| EWHC 4198 (Admin)
||Queen's Bench Division, Administrative Court (London)
Elias and Foskett LJJ
||Karon Monaghan QC and Mathew Purchase (instructed by Unison) for the claimant.
|| Susan Chan (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Lord Chancellor.
|| Michael Ford QC and Spencer Keen (instructed by the Equality and Human Rights Commission) for the Equality and Human Rights Commission as intervener.
||17 December 2014
Employment tribunal - Procedure - Fees - Defendant Lord Chancellor introducing fees scheme for employment tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal - Claimant trade union applying for judicial review of introduction of fees scheme - Whether principle of effectiveness being breached - Whether fees scheme indirectly discriminatory - Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013, .
Employment tribunal Procedure. The claimant trade union sought judicial review of the fee scheme for employment applications and appeals introduced by the Employment Tribunals and Employment Appeal Tribunal Feels Order 2013, . The Divisional Court, in dismissing the application, held that the claimant had not shown that the principle of effectiveness had been infringed or that there had been indirect discrimination, in particular, against women.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases