Boots Management Services Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v The Central Arbitration Committee [2014] EWHC 65 (Admin) (22 January 2014)

Boots Management Services Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v The Central Arbitration Committee [2014] EWHC 65 (Admin) (22 January 2014)

The CAC was not entitled to read words into paragraph 35(1) of Schedule A1 to limit the bar to collective agreements covering pay, hours, and holidays, as this would be inconsistent with the express terms and legislative scheme. The statutory bar applies even where the recognised union only bargains over limited topics. The correct remedy, if incompatibility with Article 11 ECHR exists, is a declaration of incompatibility, not judicial reinterpretation. The derecognition mechanism under Part VI does not apply where the recognised union does not bargain over pay, hours, and holidays. No final order is made pending the interested party's decision on seeking a declaration of incompatibility.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 65 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Boots Management Services Ltd; Defendant: The Central Arbitration Committee; Interested Party: The Pharmacists' Defence Association Union
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Post Hearing, Judgment Delivered, Directions for Further Steps
Outcome
No final order; directions given for further steps regarding possible declaration of incompatibility.
Legal Topics
Trade Union Recognition, Collective Bargaining, Interpretation of Statutes, Article 11 ECHR, Judicial Review, Human Rights Act 1998
Employment Law Human Rights Law Labour Law Administrative Law Trade Union Recognition Collective Bargaining Interpretation of Statutes Article 11 ECHR +2 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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Boots Management Services Ltd

Claimant

The Central Arbitration Committee

Defendant

The Pharmacists' Defence Association Union

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Post Hearing, Judgment Delivered, Directions for Further Steps

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether paragraph 35(1) of Schedule A1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, as applied, is compatible with Article 11 ECHR in blocking a trade union's statutory recognition application where another union is recognised for limited collective bargaining topics.
  2. 2 Whether the Central Arbitration Committee was entitled to read words into paragraph 35(1) to ensure compatibility with Article 11 ECHR.
  3. 3 Whether the derecognition mechanism under Part VI of the Schedule provides an alternative route for statutory recognition.

Ratio Decidendi

The CAC was not entitled to read words into paragraph 35(1) of Schedule A1 to limit the bar to collective agreements covering pay, hours, and holidays, as this would be inconsistent with the express terms and legislative scheme. The statutory bar applies even where the recognised union only bargains over limited topics. The correct remedy, if incompatibility with Article 11 ECHR exists, is a declaration of incompatibility, not judicial reinterpretation. The derecognition mechanism under Part VI does not apply where the recognised union does not bargain over pay, hours, and holidays. No final order is made pending the interested party's decision on seeking a declaration of incompatibility.

Court Disposition

No final order; directions given for further steps regarding possible declaration of incompatibility.

Orders

  • PDAU to notify the Administrative Court Office within 21 days whether it seeks a declaration of incompatibility.
  • No party required to attend court for hand-down of judgment.