Employment tribunal postponements set to be curbed
The government is seeking views on proposed legislation that would restrict adjournments in employment tribunal hearings.
The consultation, which was launched on 16 January and will close on 12 March, sets out a proposal that if one party involved in the case has already been granted two adjournments, for either a preliminary or final hearing, a third would be refused.
It also proposes that requests for adjournments be refused if made less than seven days before the hearing date. However, the restrictions would not apply in:
- exceptional circumstances
- where both parties agreed to the adjournment and the tribunal believed it would help them to reach a settlement
- the adjournment has been requested for a reason outside the person’s control, for example late disclosure of documents by the other side.
In these circumstances, an adjournment could be granted but the tribunal would consider whether a costs order should be made.
Younger drivers more likely to drink and drive
People under the age of 25 are more likely than older motorists to drive under the influence, new figures from the Association of Chief Police Officers have shown.
National statistics for the December 2014 anti-drink and drug driving campaign showed that 133,996 breath tests were carried out, with 5,885 drivers, or 4.4 per cent, failing.
However, among under-25s tested, there was a failure rate of 6.3 per cent. Among over-25s, the failure rate was 3.9 per cent.
Chief Constable Suzette Davenport, the UK’s national lead for roads policing, said on 20 January: “Younger drivers…are, unsurprisingly, more likely to take risks, but our message is very simple and very clear – you are breaking the law, you are risking your life and the lives of those around you and the consequences of doing so will plague you for the rest of your life.
“Do not drive under the influence – it is not worth the risk and you will be caught. That message is not just for younger drivers, though – it is for all those who get behind the wheel.”
Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, said the number of young people driving under the influence was “worrying”.
Meanwhile, a new offence of driving with certain controlled drugs, including some prescription drugs, above specified limits will come into force on 2 March 2015.
The drugs include eight illegal substances and eight medicines, the limits for most of which are above the normal dose.
The Department for Transport said that people able to drive safely would have a medical defence if they took a medicine included in the new offence and were above the specified limit but followed the advice of either a healthcare professional or printed in a leaflet accompanying their medication.
Medicinal drugs affected include Clonazepam, Diazepam, Flunitrazepam, Lorazepam, Oxazepam and Temazepam. The department said it estimated that around 19 million prescriptions a year were issued for those included in the new offence.
Court fee changes under fire
The government has decided not to increase fees for divorce applications but is going ahead with higher charges for civil court proceedings to recover money owed.
The Ministry of Justice, which published its response to a consultation on proposed reforms to court fees on 16 January, had proposed increasing the divorce application fee from £410 to £750. It said: “Respondents to the consultation were particularly concerned about raising the fee for a divorce. We have listened to those concerns and we have decided not to pursue this measure for the time being.”
However, it will increase the fee issue to proceedings for the recovery of money to five per cent of the value of the claim for all claims over £10,000, adding: “The fees for claims of less than £10,000, which represent over 90 per cent of all money claims, are unaffected by these proposals and will remain at their current levels.”
The maximum fee to issue proceedings will be £10,000, the fee payable to issue a claim for £200,000.
The consultation had also put forward proposals for higher fees in commercial proceedings but the government has decided against implementing these.
The Civil Justice Council, an advisory body that oversees and is responsible for modernisation of the civil justice system, said that it was “extremely concerned” by a fee based on five per cent of the value of a claim.
It warned that this could effectively price many people out of the courts, adding that it could have a “disproportionately adverse effect on some groups e.g. small and medium enterprises, low income individuals and thereby undermining equality before the law.”
The move was also criticised by the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, which said that the fee for a claim of £200,000 for a serious injury would increase by 560 per cent.
Association president John Spencer said: “This move is bound to discourage people from making valid claims – people who have every right to make them.
“This new regime will dictate that some seriously injured people will be expected to pay £10,000 up front to bring their cases to court, and many simply won’t be able to afford it.”
