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 programs of the UK and the way devolution impacts the panorama.  Certainly, the separate authorized programs and the doctrine of precedent can often produce uncommon outcomes, that are difficult for these of us advising shoppers what the legislation truly is. At current, for instance, the Courtroom of Attraction has indicated that the Northern Irish Courtroom of Attraction resolution 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, ought to be most well-liked over the opposite Employment Attraction Tribunal (EAT) resolution in Bear Scotland Ltd v Fulton [2015] IRLR 15, [2015] ICR 221,. Technically, nonetheless, it’s the EAT resolution 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 as a way 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 think about how completely 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 an identical, 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 completely different presidents producing Presidential Steering. This steering offers with all method of points and clarifies what ought to be completed specifically conditions. Practitioners will recall in the course of the pandemic the steering which was issued instructing events tips on 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 Route was issued in 2020 to information tribunals.  

One main distinction within the jurisdictions is using witness statements to interchange witness proof given by examination-in-chief. These are far 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 Route and Presidential Steering on using witness statements in Scotland, together with components to think about when ordering witness statements. The Follow Route reaffirms the presumption that oral proof will typically be most well-liked over written proof in most circumstances. In English & Welsh tribunals witnesses will 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 observe. One other notable distinction is the higher probability in English & Welsh tribunals {that a} choose will difficulty 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 seemingly issued by a choose who previously practised in England. One other distinction contains guidelines regarding disclosure of proof (in Scotland there isn’t any computerized 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 programs of Scotland, Northern Eire and England & Wales typically take care of laws which applies UK-wide. The truth that there are two main sources of employment legislation – the person contracts of employment and the varied statutory rights which apply to the varied employment relationships – typifies the confusion. Usually, the contractual facets of disputes are ruled by the authorized system’s frequent legislation which are inclined to range, specifically between Scotland and the remainder of the jurisdictions. In the meantime statutory rights have a tendency to use UK-wide reflecting the varied 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 present makes all EU legislation a part of home legislation (retained EU legislation), which applies all through the UK. 

Finally the Supreme Courtroom as the ultimate courtroom of attraction for every jurisdiction will at all times have the final say and this typically creates a uniform strategy to the interpretation of statute, offered in fact that the actual disputes get that far. The Supreme Courtroom routinely considers instances explicit to the legal guidelines of every jurisdiction and the make-up of the courtroom’s judges and their respective backgrounds makes them nicely positioned to take action. Selections of the Courtroom of Session in Scotland and the Supreme Courtroom are binding on employment tribunals. EAT selections are additionally binding on tribunals no matter the place within the UK the EAT is sitting.  The EAT tends to comply with the choices of the upper courts no matter geography; the acknowledged place of the Scottish EAT is that it’ll solely depart from an opinion of the Courtroom of Attraction the place it purely pertains to a specific facet of Scots legislation (Brown v Rentokil Ltd [1992] IRLR 302). Equally, the Courtroom of Attraction has stated it’s a matter of “pragmatic good sense” that tribunals and the EAT in both jurisdiction will comply with the choices of the upper attraction courtroom within the different jurisdiction (Caulfield and Ors v Marshalls Clay Merchandise Ltd; Clarke v Frank Staddon Ltd. [2004] EWCA Civ 422).   

A latest 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 provides 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 have interaction the statute. In Scots legislation, a unilateral promise will be distinguished from a suggestion even in a bilateral state of affairs like an employment relationship and will 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 Courtroom of Session has tended to not be as persuaded that uniformity is paramount.  The Inside Home was unwilling to disregard the Scots legislation doctrine of mutuality of contract within the pursuits of there being a consistency of strategy to the legislation of constructive dismissal within the utility 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 categorical provision within the statute, part 95(1)(c) ought to be construed as referring to a rule of English legislation reasonably than Scots legislation”.  

His Lordship added that consistency of strategy “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 direction of issues turning into extra comparable, with the notable exception of Northern Eire. All of that is prone 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 depart and relaxation breaks as a result of this restricted facet of employment legislation is devolved. Apprenticeships in Scotland are ruled by the frequent legislation, reasonably 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 typically cohere even the place the rulings aren’t strictly binding.