The tribunal gravy train is back on track

FOUR years ago, ministers introduced – for the first time – a fee for bringing a case before an employment tribunal. It was a sensible reform, at a time of austerity, to help cover the burgeoning cost of the courts.

The fees were also a deterrent against an out- of- control compensation culture fuelled by money-grubbing lawyers, zealous unions and vexatious claimants after a quick buck. When the grievance proved genuine, the fee – which ranged from £390 to £1,200 – was almost always reimbursed.

The following year the number of cases – which had hit 190,000 – fell by 70 per cent, providing some much-needed relief to firms struggling with legal costs.

But yesterday, in a case brought by Unison, the Supreme Court overruled the lower courts, deciding that the policy was unlawful and discriminated against women – who are more likely to bring claims.

The immediate cost to the taxpayer is £32million. But much more damaging are the consequences for business, which is braced for a tidal wave of litigation. The rush of claims will be fuelled by a distinctly un-Tory measure of forcing firms to publish their gender pay ‘gap’ from next year.

Inevitably, the hardest hit will be small firms who cannot afford the crippling costs of litigation and are cowed into settling.

Did such issues even cross the minds of our unelected Supreme Court judges? The Mail doubts it. After all, what experience have they, from their ivory towers, of the pressures of running a small business?

The independence of the judiciary is sacrosanct. But the Mail can’t help wondering whether our top judges have meddled in matters which should be the preserve of elected ministers.