Metrobus Ltd v Unite the Union
A trade union must comply strictly with the statutory requirements for industrial action ballots and notices, and the requirements did not breach article 11.
Facts
Unite held a ballot of its members employed by Metrobus, a bus company, about taking industrial action in a dispute over pay. The members voted in favour of action. Metrobus applied for an injunction to restrain the strike, on the grounds that the union had not complied with the requirements of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, because it had not informed the employer of the ballot result as soon as reasonably practicable, and had not given proper notice of the industrial action. The judge granted the injunction.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal dismissed the union's appeal. Lloyd LJ said that the union's failures to comply with the statutory requirements meant that the industrial action would not be protected, and that the employer was entitled to an injunction. The court rejected the argument that the requirements were so complex that they breached the right to strike under article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, holding that they served legitimate aims and were within the state's margin of appreciation. Maurice Kay LJ expressed concern about the complexity of the requirements.
Related cases on trade unions and industrial action
- ASLEF v United Kingdom (2007) 45 EHRR 34
- British Airways plc v Unite the Union (No 2) [2010] EWCA Civ 669, [2010] ICR 1316
- Demir and Baykara v Turkey (2009) 48 EHRR 54
- Express Newspapers Ltd v McShane [1980] AC 672
- International Transport Workers' Federation v Viking Line ABP Case C-438/05, [2007] ECR I-10779
- Kostal UK Ltd v Dunkley [2021] UKSC 47
- Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet Case C-341/05, [2007] ECR I-11767
- Mercury Communications Ltd v Scott-Garner [1984] Ch 37
Studying employment law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
