Vexatious Claims: Challenging the Case for Employment Tribunal Fees

被引:12
作者
Adams, Abi [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Prassl, Jeremias [4 ,5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Dept Econ, Oxford, England
[2] Univ Oxford, New Coll, Oxford, England
[3] Yale Univ, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
[4] Univ Oxford, Magdalen Coll, Oxford, England
[5] Univ Oxford, Fac Law, Oxford, England
[6] Yale Law Sch, New Haven, CT USA
基金
英国经济与社会研究理事会;
关键词
Access to Justice; Effective Judicial Protection; Employment Tribunals; Court Fees; Unison v Lord Chancellor 1 & 2; Vexatious Claims; LEGAL; PRIVATE; SUIT;
D O I
10.1111/1468-2230.12264
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
Since July 2013, recourse to Employment Tribunals in the United Kingdom has attracted fees of up to 1,200 pound for single claimants. The impact of this reform has been dramatic: within a year, claims dropped by nearly 80 per cent. This paper suggests that this fee regime is in clear violation of domestic and international norms, including Article 6(1) ECHR and the EU principle of effective judicial protection. Drawing on rational choice theory and empirical evidence, we argue that the resulting payoff structures, negative for the majority of successful claimants, strike at the very essence of these rights. The measures are, furthermore, disproportionate in light of the Government's stated policy aims: fees have failed to transfer cost away from taxpayers, have failed to encourage early dispute resolution, and have failed to deter vexatious litigants. The only vexatious claims, we find, appear to be those which motivated the reforms in the first place.
引用
收藏
页码:412 / 442
页数:31
相关论文
共 78 条
  • [1] ACAS, 2015, EV AC EARL CONC 2015, P65
  • [2] ACAS, 2015, ACAS ANN REP ACC 201, P34
  • [3] ACAS, 2015, AC ANN REP ACC 2014, P72
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2014, EUROPEAN UNION LAW
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2015, WRITT EV COURTS TRIB
  • [6] [Anonymous], 2015, CAMILLAS STORY WORKI
  • [7] [Anonymous], 1968, CMND 3623
  • [8] [Anonymous], 2015, EV EMPL JUDG B DOYLE, P12
  • [9] Arnull A, 2011, EUR LAW REV, V36, P51
  • [10] Beatson J., 2000, HUMAN RIGHTS JUDICIA, p[1, 1]