The Presidents of the Employment Tribunals (E&W, and Scotland) have updated their FAQ document containing details of how tribunals will operate during the coronavirus crisis.
There is a new road map (from page 19). You need to read the whole document, but in summary:-
June 2020: some hearings will start using the Cloud Video Platform developed by the Ministry of Justice, mainly straightforward money claims where there is little or no disputed evidence. However, most hearings will not take place during June. July/Aug 2020: some standard track cases (typically unfair dismissal) will be heard remotely, and some short-track (simple money claims) and preliminary hearings will begin to be heard in person at tribunals which are ready to embrace social distancing measures. It is unlikely open track cases (eg discrimination) will be heard, because few wing members will have been trained in the Cloud Video Platform.
Sept/Oct 2020: tribunals will begin to determine open-track cases using the Cloud Video Platform, with a small number of in-person hearings or hybrid hearings.
Nov/Dec 2020: this will be used as a period of consolidation and review.
The roadmap remarks that these are aspirations, and are contingent - in part - on increased staff numbers (especially in the London regions). It also emphasises that different ET regions are likely to go at different speeds, given the variable distribution of HMCTS staff.
As well as the roadmap, the answers to FAQs 2, 3, 9, 10 and 15 have been updated, and there are new FAQs 21, 22 and 25.
Back to Contents
DWP loses Court of Appeal case relating to Universal Credit 30 June 2020
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has lost a Court of Appeal Case, relating to four single mothers who experienced severe financial hardship due to extreme variations in the Universal Credit payments that they received as a result of a technical issue. The court ruled that issues around Universal Credit, which arise when workers get paid by their employer on a different day to their standard pay day, as the normal date falls on a weekend day or a bank holiday, were “irrational”. This is because the system incorrectly interprets that workers have been paid twice in one Universal Credit assessment period and has frequently resulted in individuals receiving significantly lower benefits payments on which to live.
The DWP lost the case at High Court in January 2019 and appealed, but the Court of Appeal has now rejected, and ruled in favour of the workers, and not DWP.
The four mothers were forced to borrow money, access food banks and fell into rent arrears. One of the claimants confirmed that the issue with the system meant that she could lose anything up to £500 per year.
It is estimated that approximately 85,000 Universal Credit claimants could be affected by the ruling, and the three judges at the Court of Appeal ruled that:
“The failure of the Secretary of State to ensure that the regulations cater for the phenomenon of ‘non-banking day salary shift’ is unlawful”.
Lady Justice Rose said:
“The threshold for establishing irrationality is very high, but it is not insuperable. This case is, in my judgment, one of the rare instances where the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions' (SSWP) refusal to put in place a solution to this very specific problem is so irrational that I have concluded that the threshold is met because no reasonable SSWP would have struck the balance in that way.”
The Chartered Institute of Payroll Professionals
Payroll: need to know
cipp.org.uk
Page 274 of 590
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker