Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Employment and Discrimination Law

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby Hairyloon » Fri Aug 18, 2017 10:21 pm

What's this bit about? In the explanatory notes:
(2)
The Employment Tribunal and its judiciary are separate from and independent of the Ministry of Justice and Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service.


I'm sure that last time I dealt with ET, it was through HMCTS. :?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Aug 26, 2017 11:25 am

If claimants are to be allowed to pick up claims that were rejected through want of fee payment, then how will this square with their right to having a fair hearing within a reasonable time?
There has been a delay of several years without any proper reason, and that assumes that they can pick it up soon and get a straightforward result.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby atticus » Sat Aug 26, 2017 11:35 am

That may be a question with which the EAT or higher appellate courts will come to grapple.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19434
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Aug 26, 2017 1:15 pm

atticus wrote:That may be a question with which the EAT or higher appellate courts will come to grapple.

Why would it fall upon them?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby atticus » Sat Aug 26, 2017 1:24 pm

They hear appeals.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19434
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Aug 26, 2017 7:02 pm

atticus wrote:They hear appeals.

This is not a question of appeals.
If the case was settled tomorrow, then it has still taken over four years: that is not a reasonable time, therefore it is likely to be a breach of ECHR Article Six so the claimant may be able to seek damages for that breach.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby atticus » Sat Aug 26, 2017 9:09 pm

If a case is settled, it has not been tried.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19434
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Aug 26, 2017 9:33 pm

atticus wrote:If a case is settled, it has not been tried.

The purpose of the court is to settle the matter, by the decision of a judge, but a judgment may be appealed if the matter is not so settled. My apologies for the ambiguity.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby dls » Sun Aug 27, 2017 9:52 am

Such a delay, to be actionable has to arise substantially through a fault in the court. You have to subtract improper delays by the parties (poss in part)
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12088
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby Hairyloon » Sun Aug 27, 2017 10:14 am

dls wrote:Such a delay, to be actionable has to arise substantially through a fault in the court.

Does it? Surely it is the responsibility of the State to ensure compliance with our Human Rights. The Court is not the contracting party to the convention.
You have to subtract improper delays by the parties (poss in part)

Doesn't the claim usually get thrown out if the parties delay too much? In any case, they would be measured in weeks at most; these delays by the state are measured in years.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 9884
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

PreviousNext

Return to Employment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest