MOVES to charge workers hundreds of pounds to take unscrupulous employers to tribunals are in "disarray", with lawyers acting for Westminster chided for wasting time at one of Scotland's highest courts, it has been claimed.
Employment lawyers went to the Court of Session this week to halt plans by the Ministry of Justice to introduce fees for those wanting to proceed through the employment tribunal service with claims for lost wages, discrimination or unfair dismissal.
It could see workers forced to pay up to £950 to have the most serious cases heard following the reforms, the first of their kind since the tribunal system was set up more than 50 years ago.
The UK Government claims the changes will move some of the £74 million cost of running tribunals from the taxpayer to those who use the system.
But concerns have been raised that the fees will deter workers from pursuing bosses and restrain access to justice.
Edinburgh firm Fox and Partners sought to obtain an interim interdict to halt the introduction of the fee structure, due to be applied to new cases starting on or after July 29.
Lord Bannatyne did not issue the order but instead opted to continue to a full hearing to make further investigation into whether the introduction of fees is legal.
If they are found to be unlawful, all fees will be refunded.
During the sitting, it emerged that drafting errors relating to equal pay claims are contained within the new policy just two weeks before it is due to be implemented.
Fox and Partners said Lord Bannatyne had been critical in court of the Lord Chancellor's departments' conduct of the two-day hearing, stating it had been "a complete waste of time" with expenses awarded to Fox and Partners as a result.
Scottish Judiciary were unable to confirm the remark last night, with Lord Bannatyne yet to post his written opinion online.
Carol Fox, of Fox and Partners, which is currently representing 12,500 equal claim cases, said: "We are very pleased with this outcome. While we are naturally disappointed not to obtain the interdict, we are pleased that in taking this legal action against the government and the imposition of fees we have raised fundamental principles regarding access to justice.
"We have obtained very significant concessions and points of clarification from the government. Further we are delighted that we have been awarded full expenses and that the Judge agreed that we have raised very important matters of law on behalf of claimants."
Ms Fox said the reforms would particularly impact low-paid women undertaking equal-pay claims. She added: "During the course of these proceedings it became clear that the Ministry of Justice is in disarray.
"The wise course of action would be for the Minister to take time to consider the drafting errors and the points of law as well as the 140 consultation responses. We believe that the evidence is overwhelmingly against the introduction of fees."
Claimants will now pay in advance an issue fee to bring the case and a second hearing fee. A basic Type A claim, for areas such as holiday pay, will be £160, rising to £250 for a more complex case such as discrimination.
The hearing fees are £230 for a basic case, rising to £950 for the more serious issues.
A Ministry of Justice source did not accept that court time had been wasted, with defence presenting its case at short notice, or that the department was in disarray over the changes.
Courts Minister Helen Grant said: "It is not fair on the taxpayer to foot the entire £74m bill for people to escalate workplace disputes to a tribunal. We want people, where they can afford to do so, to pay a contribution.
"It is in everyone's interest to avoid drawn-out disputes which emotionally damage workers and financially damage businesses. That's why we are encouraging quicker, simpler and cheaper alternatives like mediation.
"We are pleased that the court has decided not to prevent the new fee system from coming into effect on 29 July."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article