The Supreme Court decision last week that
the fee regime introduced in 2013 for Employment Tribunal claims was unlawful has gained quite a bit of attention.
It is, however, another nudge to government that any new
fee regime introduced should be moderate.
There is barely a scintilla of difference between her plan to abolish free education and the disastrous
fees regime introduced by the Tories south of the Border.»
Employment tribunal fees: the Supreme Court also granted permission to appeal to Unison, the trade union, in its challenge to the lawfulness of the employment tribunal
fees regime introduced by the coalition government.
The Supreme Court also granted permission to appeal to Unison, the trade union, in its challenge to the lawfulness of the employment tribunal
fees regime introduced by the coalition government.
Not exact matches
The Government have laid several regulations
introducing the new
regime of fixed
fees.
In March, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ)
introduced a new
fee regime with a 5 % issue
fee for money claims, capped at # 10,000, sparking intense opposition from the legal profession.
It was Unison's case that the
regime introduced by the
Fees Order breaches the EU «principle of effectiveness» by making it impossible in practice, or excessively difficult, for claimants to enforce those rights.
Lord Justice Jackson also recommended that the Government pause its planning of the introduction of a fixed
fee regime for clinical negligence claims, as he believed that
introducing a separate costs
regime for clinical negligence would lead to a «Balkanisation» of
fees for different types of claims.
He said that a reason behind extending the fixed
fees regime was that the experience of practitioners with the fixed
fee regime in low - value claims had been «satisfactory» and that the new costs management system (which had previously been
introduced by Jackson) was placing the courts under strain.