London Underground Ltd and Others v National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Worker: CA 16 Feb 2001

When a union gave notice to the employer that it intended to hold a ballot as to industrial action, the union was obliged to give details of the members to be balloted, so as to permit the employer to exercise its own rights. ‘Information as to the number, category or workplace of the employees’ concerned did not include lists of names, but did include numbers in particular grades, and at particular work places so far as the union had that information. The complainant company had obtained emergency relief preventing the respondent trade union from calling strike action on the basis of their having failed properly to provide to the employers details of their members. The union sought leave to appeal, saying it had provided the information it had.
Held: The union had the ability to contact its members. It had the ability to tell the employer who they were, and had failed to do so. The clear legislative purpose was to enable an employer to know which part or parts of its workforce were being invited to take industrial action. The leave to appeal was granted, but the appeal refused.


Lord Justice Aldous, Lord Justice Robert Walker, And Lord Justice Dyson


Times 07-Mar-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 211, [2001] IRLR 228, [2001] ICR 647




Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 226A(3A) 226A(3B)


England and Wales


Dictum disapprovedPost Office v Union of Communication Workers CA 1990
De minimis principle inindustrial relations ballots. . .

Cited by:

CitedIn re P (a minor by his mother and litigation friend); P v National Association of Schoolmasters/Union of Women Teachers HL 27-Feb-2003
The pupil had been excluded from school but then ordered to be re-instated. The teachers, through their union, refused to teach him claiming that he was disruptive. The claimant appealed a refusal of an injunction. The injunction had been refused on . .
CitedMetrobus Ltd v Unite the Union CA 31-Jul-2009
The union sought leave to appeal against an interim injunction restraining it from calling a strike. It now called in aid also its members’ Article 11 Human Rights. The company had questioned whether the ballot met the requirements of the 1992 Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.83174