Category Archives: Employment Tribunal Focus

Putting the tribunal service under the microscope.

Analysing the new Employment Tribunal statistics (March 2018)

New statistics from the UK government show that the total amount of single claims in the Employment Tribunal in 2016 came to 16,870. The total amount of single claims in 2017 totalled 23,708. An overall increase of 40.53 %.

But let’s drill down those figures in more detail…

If you compare the period January to July in 2016 to the same period in 2017 you will see that the number of single claims is relatively similar – 9,712 in 2016 when compared to 9,851 in 2017.

But then the Supreme Court handed down the Unison Judgment ([2017] UKSC 51] on 26 July 2017, and that judgment brought about the abolition of the controversial Employment Tribunal fee regime. The floodgates were then opened and the Employment Tribunal litigation boom began.

Fasten your seat belt for a moment…

If we compare the number of single claims in August 2016 (1,456) to August 2017 (3,045) [the next month following the Unison judgment] you see an increase of a whopping 109.13%.

From then on, the upward trend continues. If we compare the number of single claims in the period September to December in 2016 (5,702) to the same period in 2017 (10,812) we see an increase of 89.6%.

Click here for the raw data.

You will already have gathered that don’t get out very often! From all of the employment team @ebl miller rosenfalck have a good day.


ebl miller rosenfalck – March 2018

Contact details:

Philip Henson, Partner and Head of Employment Team



Leave a comment

Filed under ebl miller rosenfalck, employment law, Employment Tribunal Focus

Employers Ability to Pay – Tao Herbs and Acupuncture Limited v Mrs Y Jin

Mrs Jin was employed by Tao Herbs and Acupuncture Ltd, and experienced a “rocky” relationship with her employer. She was dismissed on 23 December 2008, and issued a clam for unfair dismissal.

Mrs Jin claimed she had been dismissed unfairly, as her dismissal followed her questioning whether she was being paid the national minimum wage. She was awarded £11,000 –  £9,951.34 of which was comprised of a compensatory award for unfair dismissal.

Tao Herbs appealed, arguing that pursuant to section 123 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, it would not be “just and equitable”[1] for the award to be made as it would effectively force the company into liquidation.

The Tribunal stated that the correct approach in the calculation of an award for unfair dismissal “does not pay attention to the ability of the employer to pay”, and directed that Tao Herbs had no grounds on which they could appeal the decision.

This decision serves as a timely reminder, when some UK businesses are still experiencing difficulties, of the consequences of an adverse finding from an employment tribunal.

Leave a comment

Filed under Case Law Update, Costs, Employment Tribunal Focus