LIDL Ltd, R (on the application of) v Central Arbitration Committee & Anor

The CAC did not misinterpret the statutory requirement regarding small fragmented bargaining units, gave adequate reasons for its decision, and considered all relevant factors. The claim for judicial review is therefore dismissed.

Parties: Claimant: Lidl Limited; Defendant: Central Arbitration Committee; Interested Party: GMB
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 10 August 2016
Procedural Posture: Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome: Claim for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics: Collective Bargaining, Trade Union Recognition, Judicial Review, Appropriate Bargaining Unit, Effective Management

Employment Law Administrative Law Collective Bargaining Trade Union Recognition Judicial Review Appropriate Bargaining Unit Effective Management

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Lidl Limited

Claimant

Central Arbitration Committee

Defendant

GMB

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether the CAC misconstrued paragraph 19B(3)(c) of Schedule A1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 regarding small fragmented bargaining units.
2 Whether the CAC failed to give adequate reasons for its decision, particularly regarding double segmentation by job description and location.
3 Whether the CAC failed to have regard to material considerations, specifically a previous CAC decision and a dictionary definition.

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim for judicial review dismissed.