Chris Bryden & Michael Salter salute a masterpiece of judicial analysis of the constitutional right of access to justice
- The statistics do not bear out the argument that weak unmeritorious claims were weeded out by the fees.
- In the longer term, questions of the funding of the tribunal system will have to be addressed.
The Supreme Court handed down its decision in R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51 last week. The Court held that the requirement for claimants in employment tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal proceedings to pay fees in order to access the tribunal system was void ab initio on grounds of illegality both as a matter of domestic law and EU law. The judgment of Lord Reed (with whom Lords Neuberger, Mance, Kerr, Wilson and Hughes agreed) amounts to a masterpiece of judicial analysis of the constitutional right of access to justice. The judgment bears reading in full. Law students, particularly those playing constitutional law bingo will be delighted with a decision that references Donoghue v Stephenson; Coke’s Institutes; Blackstone’s Commentaries;
