R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor

Lord Reed's opinion: Neuberger, Hale, Mance, Kerr, Wilson, Hughes
Lady Hale's opinion: Neuberger, Mance, Kerr, Wilson, Reed, Hughes

R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor
R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor
Court	UK Supreme Court
Full case name	R (on the application of UNISON) v Lord Chancellor
Decided	26 July 2017
Citation(s)	[2017] UKSC 51
Case history
Appealed from	Divisional Court of the Administrative Court [2014] EWHC 218 (Admin); Divisional Court of the Administrative Court [2014] EWHC 4198 (Admin); Court of Appeal of England and Wales [2015] EWCA Civ 935
Court membership
Judges sitting	Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes
Case opinions
	Lord Reed: The Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013 which imposed fees on appeals from employment tribunals is unlawful ab initio under English and European Union law as it has the effect of preventing access to justice.; Lady Hale, obiter: While discrimination under the Equality Act 2010 was not considered as the Order was unlawful ab initio, it was likely that it was not discriminatory in its application.;
Concurrence	Lord Reed's opinion: Neuberger, Hale, Mance, Kerr, Wilson, Hughes; Lady Hale's opinion: Neuberger, Mance, Kerr, Wilson, Reed, Hughes;
Keywords
	Rule of law, Employment Appeal Tribunal Fees Order 2013, Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, judicial review

R (UNISON) v Lord Chancellor [2017] UKSC 51 is a UK labour law and UK constitutional law judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. It held that fees for employment tribunals are unlawful because they impede access to justice, and defy the rule of law.^[1]