In the United Kingdom, there is a formal legal procedure required to enforce labor laws. The first step in this process is to establish employment tribunals, which serve as forums for resolving workplace disputes such as claims of wrongful dismissal, discrimination, and contract violations. According to Cownie et al. (2013), the purpose of employment tribunals is to provide accessible and informal processes that rarely require legal assistance. Following the presentation of the parties’ arguments and supporting evidence, a binding decision is reached.
In the event that either party is not satisfied with the tribunal’s ruling, they may proceed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT). The EAT is primarily responsible for determining the legitimacy of Employment Tribunal decisions through an in-depth examination (Barnard & Ludlow, 2016). The EAT concentrates on identifying any potential legal errors or incorrect legal interpretations that may have transpired during the initial tribunal hearing, as opposed to re-examining the entire case (Cownie et al., 2013).
A civil court, such as the High Court or the Court of Appeal, can be appealed in cases of major legal significance or ongoing dissatisfaction When reviewing EAT rulings, these courts pay close attention to the interpretation and application of legal standards (O’Sullivan 2015). An important illustration of the significance of legal concepts in employment conflicts is the Uber driver case. In this case, the courts decided that the drivers should be classified as “workers” rather than independent contractors. This case is an important demonstration of the significance of legal principles in employment issues.
The Court of Appeal, the system’s second-highest court, handles appeals against EAT rulings. Cases are heard in a more formal setting before a panel of three judges. According to Barnard and Ludlow (2016), the Supreme Court will consider appeals of its decisions. The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom rules on appeals concerning public policy or legal issues that need to be clarified. In accordance with its decisions, the lower courts are required to comply.
