Lidl Ltd v Central Arbitration Committee & Anor

Lidl Ltd v Central Arbitration Committee & Anor

Paragraph 19B(3)(c) is not engaged where there is only a single bargaining unit and no evidence of current or likely proliferation; the CAC was correct in its interpretation and application of the statutory provision, and any arguments about tensions or incompatibility with effective management were properly considered under other statutory heads.

Parties
Appellant: Lidl Limited; Respondent: Central Arbitration Committee; Respondent: GMB
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Trade Union Recognition, Collective Bargaining, Appropriate Bargaining Unit, Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation
Labour Law Administrative Law Trade Union Recognition Collective Bargaining Appropriate Bargaining Unit Judicial Review Statutory Interpretation

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lidl Limited

Appellant

Central Arbitration Committee

Respondent

GMB

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Central Arbitration Committee misconstrued paragraph 19B(3)(c) of Schedule A1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 regarding the desirability of avoiding small fragmented bargaining units within an undertaking
  2. 2 Whether the CAC gave adequate reasons for its decision, particularly regarding the risk of fragmentation and tensions within the workforce

Ratio Decidendi

Paragraph 19B(3)(c) is not engaged where there is only a single bargaining unit and no evidence of current or likely proliferation; the CAC was correct in its interpretation and application of the statutory provision, and any arguments about tensions or incompatibility with effective management were properly considered under other statutory heads.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.