The Union complained that it had not been allowed to expel from its membership a member of the far right BNP party. They said that his views were incompatible with the union’s stated objectives. There was no related closed shop.
Held: The provisions were an interference with the Union’s right of free association, and the uinon’s actions similarly interfered the member’s rights of free association. The question was the extent to which the state could properly itself interfere to impose its views. No identifiable hardship was suffered by non-membership, and no unreasonable or abusive conduct shown in the union’s actions. The Union’s complaint succeeded.
11002/05,  ECHR 184, Times 09-Mar-2007,  ECHR 1657
see Also – Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen v Lee EAT 23-Feb-2004
EAT Contract within s174(4)(a)(iii) of TULRA 1992 for which a Trade Union cannot expel a member is limited to being or ceasing to be a member of a political party (in this case BNP). A union can expel a member if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Employment
Updated: 04 August 2022; Ref: scu.249250