Unison, R (On the Application Of) v The Lord Chancellor [2015] EWCA Civ 935 (26 August 2015)

Unison, R (On the Application Of) v The Lord Chancellor [2015] EWCA Civ 935 (26 August 2015)

The Court held that, on the evidence before it, there was insufficient proof that the Fees Order rendered access to the Employment Tribunals impossible in practice or excessively difficult for claimants, as required by EU and ECHR law. The dramatic reduction in claims was not, without more, evidence of unaffordability, and no individual cases were presented showing actual denial of access. The challenge based on indirect discrimination and breach of the public sector equality duty also failed on the evidence. The claim was therefore dismissed.

Citation
[2015] EWCA Civ 935
Parties
Claimant/appellant: The Queen (on the application of UNISON); Defendant/respondent: The Lord Chancellor; Intervener: Equality and Human Rights Commission
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (administrative Law) / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Access to Justice, Court Fees, Judicial Review, Indirect Discrimination, EU Law Effectiveness Principle, Public Sector Equality Duty
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Employment Law Human Rights Law European Union Law Access to Justice Court Fees Judicial Review +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 21
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen (on the application of UNISON)

Claimant/appellant

The Lord Chancellor

Defendant/respondent

Equality and Human Rights Commission

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (administrative Law) / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 unlawfully restricts access to justice under EU and ECHR principles by making it impossible or excessively difficult for claimants to bring claims.
  2. 2 Whether the Fees Order is indirectly discriminatory against claimants with protected characteristics.
  3. 3 Whether the Lord Chancellor breached the public sector equality duty under section 149 of the Equality Act 2010.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that, on the evidence before it, there was insufficient proof that the Fees Order rendered access to the Employment Tribunals impossible in practice or excessively difficult for claimants, as required by EU and ECHR law. The dramatic reduction in claims was not, without more, evidence of unaffordability, and no individual cases were presented showing actual denial of access. The challenge based on indirect discrimination and breach of the public sector equality duty also failed on the evidence. The claim was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals in both Unison 1 and Unison 2 dismissed
  • No order for repayment of fees as the Fees Order was not found unlawful