Unison has lost its second judicial review challenge to the Employment Tribunal and EAT fee regime.
Despite the fact that this time they were able to use published statistics to show that fees made claimants less willing to bring claims they did not show that a particular claimant had been unable to bring a claim thereby rendering any EU derived employment rights ineffective. Nor did they show that women, ethnic minorities or the disabled were placed at a substantial disadvantage.
The Court went on to hold that even if they were placed at a substantial disadvantage it would be in pursuit of three legitimate objectives namely:
- To transfer a part of the cost of running the employment tribunals and the EAT to the users who benefit from them.
- To remove unmeritorious claims
- To encourage alternative dispute resolution
The Court concluded that in view of the fee remission scheme that had been put in place that any discriminatory effect was justified and proportionate.