As an employment lawyer primarily practising in Scotland who’s initially from Northern Eire, I take a eager curiosity in how the process and the legislation differs throughout the authorized methods of the UK and the way devolution impacts the panorama. Certainly, the separate authorized methods and the doctrine of precedent can sometimes produce uncommon outcomes, that are difficult for these of us advising shoppers what the legislation truly is. At current, for instance, the Court docket of Attraction has indicated that the Northern Irish Court docket of Attraction determination in Chief Consteady of Police v Agnew [2019] NICA 32, [2019] IRLR 792 which affirmed that there didn’t must be a restrict on the gaps between deductions making up a collection for the needs of bringing deductions claims, needs to be most popular over the opposite Employment Attraction Tribunal (EAT) determination in Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton [2015] IRLR 15, [2015] ICR 221,. Technically, nonetheless, it’s the EAT determination in Bear Scotland which is binding on tribunals throughout Britain.
In the meantime, devolution of employment legislation stays excessive on the political agenda, significantly in Scotland. The Devolution (Employment) (Scotland) Invoice, which seeks to amend the Scotland Act 1998 in an effort to grant legislative competence for employment issues to the Scottish Parliament, is due for its second studying on 3 February 2023.Additional, devolution of employment tribunal capabilities is anticipated to happen in 2025. It appears an apt time subsequently to contemplate how totally different the process and the substantive legal guidelines truly are all through the employment tribunals of Scotland and England & Wales.
The process within the employment tribunals
Though the laws is equivalent, the employment tribunals function individually in Scotland and England & Wales. There’s one algorithm – the Employment Tribunal Guidelines of Process 2013 – which apply north and south of the border. In Scotland and England & Wales there are totally different presidents producing Presidential Steerage. This steering offers with all method of points and clarifies what needs to be accomplished particularly conditions. Practitioners will recall throughout the pandemic the steering which was issued instructing events find out how to conduct the web Cloud Video Platform hearings. Different steering responds to the actual necessities of that jurisdiction. Events utilizing tribunals in Wales, for instance, have the suitable to make use of the Welsh language within the conduct of hearings in Wales and a Presidential Follow Course was issued in 2020 to information tribunals.
One main distinction within the jurisdictions is using witness statements to exchange witness proof given by examination-in-chief. These are way more generally ordered in England & Wales, though the pandemic and the transfer to on-line hearings in Scotland definitely noticed a rise in using witness statements. On 3 August 2022, the President of the Employment Tribunals (Scotland) issued a Follow Course and Presidential Steerage on using witness statements in Scotland, together with elements to contemplate when ordering witness statements. The Follow Course reaffirms the presumption that oral proof will usually be most popular over written proof in most circumstances. In English & Welsh tribunals witnesses could be current within the tribunal and listen to the witness proof previous to giving their very own proof, whereas in Scottish tribunals this isn’t the recognised follow. One other notable distinction is the higher chance in English & Welsh tribunals {that a} decide will concern an oral judgment with out reserving judgment and sending a written judgment to the events in the end. I discover that when this occurs in Scotland, it’s greater than probably issued by a decide who previously practised in England. One other distinction consists of guidelines regarding disclosure of proof (in Scotland there isn’t any automated responsibility to reveal paperwork which can adversely have an effect on your individual case).
The legislation
In employment legislation, the tribunals and courts of the separate authorized methods of Scotland, Northern Eire and England & Wales usually cope with laws which applies UK-wide. The truth that there are two main sources of employment legislation – the person contracts of employment and the assorted statutory rights which apply to the assorted employment relationships – typifies the confusion. Usually, the contractual features of disputes are ruled by the authorized system’s widespread legislation which are likely to differ, particularly between Scotland and the remainder of the jurisdictions. In the meantime statutory rights have a tendency to use UK-wide reflecting the assorted devolutionary preparations which reserve employment legislation to the law-making powers of the Westminster Parliament. These days, the European Union (Withdrawal Settlement) Act 2020, at the moment makes all EU legislation a part of home legislation (retained EU legislation), which applies all through the UK.
Finally the Supreme Court docket as the ultimate court docket of enchantment for every jurisdiction will all the time have the final say and this usually creates a uniform method to the interpretation of statute, offered after all that the actual disputes get that far. The Supreme Court docket routinely considers instances explicit to the legal guidelines of every jurisdiction and the make-up of the court docket’s judges and their respective backgrounds makes them nicely positioned to take action. Choices of the Court docket of Session in Scotland and the Supreme Court docket are binding on employment tribunals. EAT choices are additionally binding on tribunals no matter the place within the UK the EAT is sitting. The EAT tends to observe the selections of the upper courts no matter geography; the acknowledged place of the Scottish EAT is that it’s going to solely depart from an opinion of the Court docket of Attraction the place it purely pertains to a selected side of Scots legislation (Brown v Rentokil Ltd [1992] IRLR 302). Equally, the Court docket of Attraction has stated it’s a matter of “pragmatic good sense” that tribunals and the EAT in both jurisdiction will observe the selections of the upper enchantment court docket within the different jurisdiction (Caulfield and Ors v Marshalls Clay Merchandise Ltd; Clarke v Frank Staddon Ltd. [2004] EWCA Civ 422).
A current case which got here earlier than the EAT sitting in Scotland – Ineos Infrastructure Grangemouth v Jones & Ors [2022] EAT 22 – has emphasised that, the place the laws applies north and south of the border, it’s fascinating for it to be interpreted uniformly. On this case, the Scottish EAT thought of an argument from the employer that a suggestion of a pay rise made to workers which might have engaged the prohibition on such gives in s145B of the Commerce Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was not, in Scots legislation, a suggestion in any respect and subsequently didn’t interact the statute. In Scots legislation, a unilateral promise could be distinguished from a suggestion even in a bilateral scenario like an employment relationship and could be binding and enforceable with out acceptance. The EAT however discovered this argument to be misconceived; the aim of the statutory provision was to guard rights enshrined in article 11 of the European Conference on Human Rights and these had been the identical each north and south of the border.
The Court docket of Session has tended to not be as persuaded that uniformity is paramount. The Internal Home was unwilling to disregard the Scots legislation doctrine of mutuality of contract within the pursuits of there being a consistency of method to the legislation of constructive dismissal within the software of s.95(1)(c) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (McNeill v Aberdeen Metropolis Council (No.2) [2013] CSIH 102). Lord Drummond Younger’s judgment referred to there being “no apparent motive why, within the absence of any specific provision within the statute, part 95(1)(c) needs to be construed as referring to a rule of English legislation quite than Scots legislation”.
His Lordship added that consistency of method “doesn’t appear a enough justification for a significant inroad upon the Scots legislation of contract in a case that’s in any other case ruled by Scots legislation”.
The development
In actuality, regardless of some variations, uniformity is the watchword throughout the nations of the UK with the development arguably pointing in the direction of issues changing into extra related, with the notable exception of Northern Eire. All of that is more likely to change sooner or later if employment legislation is devolved from the powers of the Westminster Parliament. It’s evident from Northern Eire that the devolution of employment legislation has resulted in a definite divergence of each legislation and process. What path this may take issues in Wales and Scotland stays to be seen, however some indication has been obvious already. Agricultural employees in Scotland and Wales, like their Northern Irish counterparts, depend on extra beneficial provisions on annual go away and relaxation breaks as a result of this restricted side of employment legislation is devolved. Apprenticeships in Scotland are ruled by the widespread legislation, quite than the statutory overlay present in England and Wales. Separate Truthful Work Commissions in each nations exist. These involved concerning the disparate outcomes this would possibly produce is perhaps reassured by contemplating that, regardless of the future constitutional arrange will result in, the precept of judicial comity will apply and the tribunals and courts making use of employment legislation will usually cohere even the place the rulings are usually not strictly binding.
