R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor | |
Court: | UK Supreme Court |
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 |
Date Decided: | 26 July 2017 |
Full Name: | R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor |
Citations: | [2017] UKSC 51 |
Number Of Judges: | 7 |
Judges: | Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes |
Concurring: |
|
Opinions: |
|
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]
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.
The Supreme Court unanimously held that employment tribunal fees were unlawful.