TRADE UNION

R (Ultraframe (UK) Ltd) v Central Arbitration Committee: [2005] EWCA Civ 560

CA: Buxton, Maurice Kay LJJ and Sir Martin Nourse: 22 April 2005

Two trade unions sought recognition to be entitled to conduct collective bargaining on behalf of a group of workers employed by the claimant company. A secret postal ballot, held at the direction of the Central Arbitration Committee revealed that a majority of those voting supported such recognition, but the result of the ballot, as notified to the committee by the appointed qualified independent person, was that the necessary percentage of approval of relevant employees required by paragraph 29(3)(b) of Schedule A1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 was by four votes not achieved. The unions raised complaints alleging that a number of employees had not received ballot papers, and the matter was referred to a panel of the Central Arbitration Committee. The panel concluded that five employees, who would have voted in favour of the unions, had not been given a reasonable opportunity of voting and that the committee had jurisdiction to direct a re-run of the ballot if the statutory standards had not been satisfied, and a re-run was subsequently directed. The company sought judicial review of the committee's decision. The judge held that the committee had no jurisdiction to order the re-run of the ballot.

The committee appealed.

The Court of Appeal held:
While paragraph 29 of Schedule A1 to the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 excluded any general discretion on the part of the Central Arbitration Committee in the interpretation of the ballot, it did not deprive the committee of any supervisory role as to the validity of the ballot, and the general role and powers of the committee throughout the statute provided the committee with the jurisdiction to investigate and, if appropriate, to annul the ballot.

The appeal was allowed.

Appearances: Thomas Linden and Dan Squires (Treasury Solicitor) for the defendant committee; Andrew Hochhauser QC and Helen Mountfield (Engineering Employers' Federation) for the claimant company; the unions and the qualified independent person, joined as interested parties, did not appear and were not represented.