• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11

It could be argued that the employment tribunal system is a breach of Article 6, which is demonstrated in Smith v Secretary for Trade and Industry3 and in Scanfuture UK ltd v Secretary for State for Trade4 which led to the procedures

Extracts from this document...


The European Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is more commonly known as 'the Convention' was introduced by the Council of Europe in 1950 and was then enforced in 1953. The reason for the Convention being introduced was to prevent events which occurred during the World War Two from occurring again. The aim of the Convention was to protect individuals' rights against infringements by the state. The Human Rights Act 1998 developed Convention rights into UK domestic law through a restricted basis, the Act came into force on 2nd October 2000. Human Rights Act is set to have an immense amount of protection for both private and public sector employees. It means individuals can ascertain their Convention rights against the state in a UK court and no longer have to go to Strasbourg. However if domestic legislation is unambiguous and can not be interpreted in accordance with Convention, the domestic statute takes precedence.1 It's unlawful for public authority to act in a way which is incompatible with Convention rights. There are situations were the court has decided that primary legislation is incompatible with Convention rights which then leads to a 'declaration of compatibility' being issued. An Employment Tribunal can not make a declaration of incompatibility, therefore employment cases have to wait until they have reached Court of Appeal. Enforcing the Convention has had many financial and practical implications. An example of this is R.V. Admiralty Board of the Defence council, exp. Lustig - Prean.2 "Fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law". Article 6 is the right to a fair trial, the implications which this article will have on employment law is in cases where employee's feel they have unfairly been dismissed by their public sector employer. It could be argued that the employment tribunal system is a breach of Article 6, which is demonstrated in Smith v Secretary for Trade and Industry3 and in Scanfuture UK ltd v Secretary for ...read more.


His employee's offered to reduce his hours from 5 to 4 1/2 days but he refused, he resigned stating constructive dismissal. But his claims were dismissed at employment tribunal and appeal to European Court Human Rights was rejected also. The issue which lead to this decision form being made was that the employee's offered to reduce his hours so he could pray therefore his rights are not restricted. The Shops (Sunday Trading) (NI) Order 1997 indicates that there must be a genuine religious persuasion for the person not wanting to work. In Stedman v UK16 this case dealt with that a woman's contract declared that she had to work Sunday, she refused to do so was dismissed and claimed breach Article 9 but it was a breach of contractual obligations not her religious beliefs. In the case of Arrowsmith v UK17 this questions what constitutes a belief, the facts of this case are a woman is distributing leaflets about troops in Northern Ireland, she was removed from a shopping center. The European Court of Human Rights held this had nothing to do with religious beliefs so could look for protection under Article 9. Article 10 leads to a number of implications to employment law and its practice. It deals with the right to freedom of expression. The details of Article entail that everybody has the right to freedom of expression which encompasses the freedom to possess opinions; receive and convey information and idea's without interference from public authority. The Fair Employment and Treatment (NI) Order 1998 depicts the significance that the right to freedom of expression is not absolute. This right is confined due to the competing rights between worker's freedom of expression and the employee's right to manage the workplace. Employment is restricted through the use of contracts, some employee's argue that their rights have been reduced through their contract. This Article has a number of challenges to foresee, firstly an employer cant recruit someone due to their political views, secondly the article has to be affinity to Public Interest Disclosures Act 1998. ...read more.


114, February 2003, Application of Human Rights Act on Unfair Dismissal Law, IRS Employment Review 804, 23rd July 2004 What the Europeans did for us, IRS Employment Review 803, 2nd July 2004 Appointment of Tribunal Lay members now complies with Human Rights Law, IRS Employment Law Review 740, 19th November 2001 Commission Proposes new Directive, Employment Review 805, 6th August 2004 Websites http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?articleid=29867&searchresults=1 http://www.hrmguide.co.uk/hrm/steele/bulletin21.htm http://www.thompson.law.co.uk/Itext/11450006.htm#06 http://www.thompson.law.co.uk/Itext/11430001.htm#01 http://www.thompson.law.co.uk/Itext/11330001.htm#04 http://www.thompson.law.co.uk/Itext/11040004.htm#04 http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-rights/chapters/rights-of-workers/the-european-convention-on-human-rights-of-workers-under-the-euopean-convent.shtml http://www.bto.co.uk/artocles/elc_articles_1.htm Employment Law Assignment Tutor - Ivan Topping Name - Natasha Mc Cullough Student Number- 13347402 Course- LLB Law and Economics Year- 3 1 under s.3 Human Rights article 1998, '[so] far as it is possible to do so....must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights.' 2 R.V. Admiralty Board of the Defence Council, exp. Lustig - Prean (1996) IRLR 100 3 Smith v Secretary for Trade and Industry (2000) ICR 69 4 Scanfuture UK Ltd v Secretary for Trade (2001) 5 Niemitz Germany (1993) 16 EHRR 97 6 Halford v UK (1997) 24 EHRR 523 7 Onof v Nikon France (2002) ECC 17 8 XXX v YYY (2004) IRLR 471 CA 9 Leander v Sweden (1987) 9 EHRR 433 10 Whitefield v GMC (1996) IRLR 62 11O'Fylnn v Airlinks Airport Coach Ltd EAT/0269/01 12 X v Y (2004) EWCA (Civ) 662 13 Goodwill v UK (1996) 22 EHRR 123 14 Smith and Grady v UK (1999) IRLR 734 15 Ahamd v UK (1982) EHRR 126 16 Stedman v UK (1997) 23 EHRR CD 168 17 Arrowsmith v UK (1978) 3 EHRR 218 18 Vogt v Germany (1996) 21 EHRR 205 19 Kara v UK (1999) EHRLR 232 20 Swedish Engine Driver's Union v Sweden (1979-80) 1 EHRR 617 21 Young, James and Webster v UK (1981) 4 EHRR 38 22 The Human Right Act and labour law 23 Anthony Lester, The Human Rights 1998 24 www.europa.eu.int/prelex,reference,no.COM(2004)279 ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Sources of Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Sources of Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    the english legal system unit1 assignment4

    4 star(s)

    a number of politically appointed officials who had the responsibility for matters concerning law and justice. For example: the Lord Chancellor was responsible for the courts and to a certain extent the legal profession and the Home Secretary was responsible for police and prisons.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    The english legal system unit1 assignment3 three part question

    3 star(s)

    Two requirements must be met if a precedent is to be binding: Firstly, it must be a ratio decidendi statement where the judgments contain findings of fact, both direct and inferential. Secondly statements of law must be applied where the judge will state the principles of law applicable to the case.

  1. Sainsburys - employee rights

    E.g. if there was a female employee and a male employee doing the same job but the employer believes the female should get paid more because women work harder. This is why the equal pay act is there, so that if this was to happen then the male employee could go to an employment tribunal.

  2. To what extent do you think these aims have been (or will be) facilitated ...

    23 S. 70 (1) LRA 1925: 'Interests Capable of Being Overriding' 24 Hayton: "a cavernous crack in the fundamental mirror principal under which the title is supposed to reflect accurately and irrefutably the facts material to a particular title" 25 s. 70 (1) (a)

  1. Discuss whether incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into the domestic legislation ...

    This was seen in the case of R v Lambert [2001]14 Fears for the loss of our sovereignty are not a new phenomenon however, as section 2 of the European Communities Act 1972 has also be identified as undermining the doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty.

  2. The Land Registration Act 2002 heralds major changes to the law and procedures regarding ...

    Here, they argued that it is actually the only way for them to force the true owner to appreciate their land especially whose owned a valuable one. It will be a waste to leave those land without any development and therefore they has the rights to take action if the

  1. How has the European Court of Human Rights contributed to the protection of children's ...

    "educational supervision" and her treatment did not overstep Art. 3 threshold. Douglas and Lowe36 see this approach as very paternalistic and disappointing, indicating a long way towards recognition of autonomy rights. Indeed, even after UNCRC, it shows no improvement over Nielsen-type attitude, lacking in children's empowerment and posing a poor example for states37.

  2. Outcome (3): Analyse the provisions relating to the police powers of arrest, search, seizure, ...

    power without a warrant to arrest someone for a none arrestable offence. A police constable may use these powers and arrest some one when he/she has reasonable grounds to believe that an arrestable offence has been committed. There are also general arrest conditions under section 24 of the Police and

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work