News

24th January, 2017

Limits of Trade Union Protection?

Metrolink RatpDev Ltd v Stephen Morris

The Employment Tribunal determined the claimant had been dismissed contrary to section 152 of TULR(C)A. The fact of dismissal was admitted, the employer asserted the reason for dismissal was conduct. The conduct in question related to the receipt and use of confidential information which had been copied from a manager’s diary without his consent. The claimant attempted to refer to the information when raising a collective grievance.  It was not suggested that the claimant had himself been responsible for the initially illegitimately obtaining the information. The Employment Tribunal concluded that in referring to the material, and placing reliance upon it, the Claimant’s conduct was protected by section 152. On appeal, Ed Morgan argued the Employment Judge had fallen into error; confusing the issues of "conduct" with "context". Slade J agreed. She concluded that use of the information for trade union purposes did not enjoy the protection of the Act. Preserving the findings of fact made by the Employment Tribunal, Slade J remitted the case back to a differently constituted Tribunal to reconsider the section 152 question and made a costs order against the claimant. In doing so, she observed: 

"In the circumstances of this case and on the findings of fact in the conclusions section of this Judgment, which must in any event stand, this case comes very close to a case in which on a proper application of the law there can be no other possible answer than to say that the reason for dismissal was not for the Claimant taking part in trade union activities but for the gross misconduct in retaining unlawfully obtained confidential and private information. I am on the verge of making an order for substitution and it is difficult to see in the circumstances of this case how more than one outcome on a proper application of the law is possible.  However, there would be a very small percentage chance that the outcome would be different on remission... However, I would like it noted in the Judgment that if on a remitted hearing the Claimant fails in his claim the Tribunal should consider very carefully whether a costs order should be made against him."



Latest News...

Health and safety employment claims in the time of Coronavirus: Isabel Baylis explores the new line of cases

9th June, 2021
Isabel Baylis provides key insights into the new realm of health and safety cases in the employment context.

9SJS Insurance Fraud team delivers a Virtual Mock Trial to DAC Beachcrofts Birmingham Office, in relation to fraudulent EL/PL claims

8th June, 2021
9 St John Street's Insurance Fraud team have today delivered a Virtual Mock Trial to DAC Beachcrofts Birmingham Office, in relation to fraudulent EL/PL claims.

Malka Afzal to start her 2nd six months pupillage on 7th June 2021

7th June, 2021
9 St John Street Chambers are delighted to announce Malka Afzal is to start her 2nd six months pupillage on 7th June 2021