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 dls » Sun Aug 27, 2017 7:31 pm

You are correct that the state has a duty to ensure a measure of compliance by the litigating parties, but all three elements (court, claimant and defendant and any others) are perfectly capable of failures to puruse a case. Your original post failed to recognise that in looking at the total delay, the failures of all three need to be checked.
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 8:19 pm

dls wrote:You are correct that the state has a duty to ensure a measure of compliance by the litigating parties, but all three elements (court, claimant and defendant and any others) are perfectly capable of failures to puruse a case. Your original post failed to recognise that in looking at the total delay, the failures of all three need to be checked.

But we are talking here of a case where the claim was delayed because the fees were not paid. If the fees ought never to have been needed then the failure is all with the court.
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 » Sun Aug 27, 2017 9:41 pm

Hairy's point relates to the delay caused by the unlawful imposition of the fees regime.

There may be an argument. If so, it will be resolved by one of the higher courts.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19434
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Guidance - No Tribunal Fees Decision

Postby Hairyloon » Mon Aug 28, 2017 12:40 am

atticus wrote:There may be an argument. If so, it will be resolved by one of the higher courts.

I'm still not getting why it would be the higher courts. Nor, come to that, how a claimant would get it there. Can he take the nation to the small claims court for a Human Right's breach?
I don't see why not, except that it is the courts service that committed the 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 dls » Mon Aug 28, 2017 7:35 am

it is the courts service that committed the breach...


How? The rules under which they operated were not set by them.
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 » Mon Aug 28, 2017 10:27 am

dls wrote:
it is the courts service that committed the breach...


How? The rules under which they operated were not set by them.


That's the Nuremburg defence isn't it? Just following orders...
But aside from that are you agreeing that the small claims court is an appropriate route to pursue the claim?
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 » Mon Aug 28, 2017 7:59 pm

There is no claim. The 'nuremberg defence' is, sadly but demonstrably, pure crap.
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 » Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:11 pm

dls wrote:There is no claim.

How is there not a claim? There is a clear breach of Human Rights, unless you can argue that the delay was reasonable.
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 Sep 02, 2017 8:23 am

Possibly a silly question, but why did this get all the way to the Supreme Court? Presumably each one made an error in law else the appeal would not be allowed.
Or is it normal practice in cases such as this, that the lower courts effectively delegate it upwards?
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 Sep 02, 2017 8:39 am

The unsuccessful party in each of the lower courts appealed.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19434
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

PreviousNext

Return to Employment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests