Two trade unions had sought recognition. Ballots had been held which almost secured recognition but fell a handful of votes short. The Unions criticised the way the ballots had been conducted, saying that a number of employees had not received voting papers, and had asked the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) to order a re-run. The CAC now sought clarification of its jurisdiction to make such an order, the parties having agreed that the order in fact made was irrational.
Held: Despite the concession, in view of the significance of the question raised, the court had jurisdiction to determine the appeal. The CAC had power to order a ballot to be re-run. It was the overall function and structure of the CAC to take part in such decisions, and there was nothing in the schedule to gainsay that jurisdiction.
Judges:
Buxton, Maurice Kay, LJJ, Sir Martin Nourse
Citations:
Times 11-May-2005
Statutes:
Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 sch 1 para 29
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Ultraframe (UK) Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v GMB and others Admn 4-Feb-2005
The unions sought recognition in representing the employees, and a ballot was undertaken. Though a majority of the workers voting opted for representation, their numbers voting fell four below the minimum required. The unions said that not all . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Salem HL 3-Mar-1999
The House of Lords has the power to hear a case where the parties have in effect settled and there remains no lis at issue, but the House will not hear such an academic case where no general issue of importance is at stake, or the facts are . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.224823
