Law Commission consultation on employment law hearing structures

by Laurie Anstis on September 28, 2018

As anticipated, the Law Commission has now set out its full consultation on ’employment law hearing structures’.

This consultation looks at the way in which the employment law jurisdiction (and also discrimination claims outside the employment field) is split between the employment tribunal, EAT and civil courts.

The Law Commission says ‘the scope of this project should … be to propose the removal of discrepancies in the light of several decades of experience of the employment tribunals system‘, but rules out consideration of an ‘Employment and Equalities Court’ as being outside its remit. Read the rest of this entry »

Law Commission to consider ‘Employment Law Hearing Structures’

by Laurie Anstis on December 18, 2017

The Law Commission has set out its 13th programme of law reform, to be developed over the next three years.

One of the areas of review is ’employment law hearing structures’, in respect of which the report says (paras 2.14-16):

The Civil Courts Structure Review led by Briggs LJ noted that there is an “awkward
area” of shared and exclusive jurisdiction in the fields of discrimination and employment law, which has generated boundary issues between the courts and the Employment Tribunal System (the Employment Tribunal and the Employment Appeals Tribunal). As sui generis entities, both employment tribunals sit “uncomfortably stranded between the Civil Courts and the main Tribunal Service”. These issues are well known amongst employment law experts, judges and practitioners; they can cause delay and can also prevent cases being determined by the judges best equipped to handle them. Read the rest of this entry »

New presidential case management order lifts stay on post-Unison cases

by Laurie Anstis on August 18, 2017

On 9 August 2017 the President of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales) issued a case management order staying any claims or applications relying on the outcome of the Unison employment tribunal fees judicial review case in the Supreme Court. A similar order was issued in Scotland.

This was always said to be a temporary stay (a point confirmed in subsequent correspondence) and today a further case management order has been issued lifting the stay.

The order and explanatory notes say that reimbursement of fees and, importantly, applications for reinstatement of claims will be dealt with (where necessary) according to administrative procedures to be announced shortly.

Taylor review outcome due next week?

by Laurie Anstis on July 7, 2017

The outcome of the Taylor review on Employment Practices in the Modern Economy seems likely to set the agenda for employment law over the next few years.

In an exchange on Twitter, Matthew Taylor has now said that he is expecting his report to be published “early next week”.

10% increase in compensation for injury to feelings – the Vento bands and Simmons v Castle

by Laurie Anstis on July 5, 2017

Back in October 2012 I wrote about the case of Simmons v Castle and its implications for employment law.

In Simmons v Castle the Court of Appeal applied a general 10% uplift to “general damages”. There was no mention of compensation for injury to feelings in employment tribunal discrimination claims, but my conclusion at the time was that “it looks a lot like the effect of Simmons v Castle is also to raise compensation for injury to feelings in discrimination claims … by 10%.Read the rest of this entry »