Industrial Relations in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Secretary of State for Employment v ASLEF (No. 2)
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 19 May 1972

    If he, with the others, takes steps wilfully to disrupt the undertaking, to produce chaos so that it will not run as it should, then each one who is a party to those steps is guilty of a breach of his contract. It is no answer for any one of them to say "I am only obeying the rule book", or "I am not bound to do more than a 40-hour week". Wages are to be paid for services rendered, not for producing deliberate chaos.

  • National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v Serco Ltd (trading as Serco Docklands)
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 04 Mar 2011

    I do not think this is now a legitimate approach, if it ever was. In my judgment the legislation should simply be construed in the normal way, without presumptions one way or the other. Indeed, as far as the 1992 Act is concerned, the starting point it that it should be given a "likely and workable construction", as Lord Bingham of Cornhill put it in P v National Association of Schoolmasters/ Union of Women Teachers [2003] ICR 386, para.7.

  • Post Office v Crouch
    • House of Lords
    • 11 Dic 1973

    But the Industrial Relations Act is of a very different character. It creates rights, as in section 5, but breaches of these rights are not torts—they are only unfair industrial practices. A person alleging an unfair industrial practice cannot bring an action: he can only make a complaint to an Industrial Tribunal. The majority of the members of an Industrial Tribunal are not lawyers. The Tribunal does not give a remedy as of right. Under section 106 it

  • Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service
    • House of Lords
    • 22 Nov 1984

    By "irrationality" I mean what can by now be succinctly referred to as "Wednesbury unreasonableness" ( Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 K.B. 223). It applies to a decision which is so outrageous in its defiance of logic or of accepted moral standards that no sensible person who had applied his mind to the question to be decided could have arrived at it.

  • Johnson v Unisys Ltd
    • House of Lords
    • 22 Mar 2001

    In my opinion, all the matters of which Mr Johnson complains in these proceedings were within the jurisdiction of the industrial tribunal. His most substantial complaint is of financial loss flowing from his psychiatric injury which he says was a consequence of the unfair manner of his dismissal. Such loss is a consequence of the dismissal which may form the subject-matter of a compensatory award.

    By section 207, a failure to comply with any provision of a Code is not in itself actionable but in any proceedings before an industrial tribunal In 1977 ACAS issued a Code of Practice entitled "Disciplinary Practice and Procedures in Employment". It explained why it was important to have disciplinary rules and procedures which were in writing and readily available to management and employees.

  • Universe Tankships Inc. of Monrovia v International Transport Workers Federation (Marine)
    • House of Lords
    • 01 Abr 1982

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT