Are Tribunal Fees Dead and Buried???

Would you like a little light relief from Brexit or the General Election asks Chris Wilkinson of Expert HR Solutions? How about “are Tribunal Fees dead and buried” after the 2017 Supreme Court Ruling that they were discriminatory and therefore unlawful. Don’t hold your breath he says, but apparently not, read on to find out what the latest thinking is.

The introduced of fees in 2013 to bring a claim to the employment tribunal was primarily to reduce the number of vexatious and weak cases. They were also seen as a shield from effectively being coerced into settling illegitimate claims simply to mitigate the costs of defending such claims. The impact of the charges was dramatic: over three years there was a 79 per cent reduction in claims being filed.

Their introduction led to the shrinking of the caseload which led inevitably to a reduction in judges. Since the abolition of the fees, the number of claims being filed has surged. This has led to an overload in the tribunal system and in long delays, sometimes of up to a year between filing a claim and the date of a hearing. On average time for claims to be heard in the UK is eight months. It is not uncommon for key witnesses to move on or for memories of events to become blurred in this time. So, the argument is that justice delayed is simply justice denied.

The Ministry of Justice is seeking to strike a better balance between protecting claimants’ interests and their ability to access justice and ensuring there is a viable infrastructure in place to deliver it. The existing tribunal system is funded by the taxpayer and it is questionable that they are getting value for money. So, the Ministry of Justice is considering alternatives to the status quo, these include a more sophisticated system of tribunal fees; for example, means testing fee applications or reintroducing much lower charges. 

The Supreme Court ruled that the fee regime established in 2013 was unlawful, but not that the application of any employment tribunal fees would be unlawful.  Ultimately, any reintroduction of charges would need to comply with the Supreme Court judgment and ensure that the shortcomings of the fee structure previously implemented are addressed. Any new fee structure would need to serve the purpose of focusing a potential claimant’s mind, with a view to reducing the volume of weak cases and be affordable enough that it would not be prohibitive for individuals on lower incomes.

If you would like any advice about this or any other employment issue why not give us a call on 01202 611033, the initial discussion is free.