§ Lynne JonesTo ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what her definition is of a weak employment tribunal case; and what evidence she has considered on(a) the incidence of such cases in the system and (b) the incidence of cases being settled very close to a hearing. [26437]
§ Alan JohnsonThe information is as follows:
(a) It is not possible to collect statistical data on the strength of individual cases. Any assessment of the merits of an individual case is necessarily subjective.
A working definition was used for the Regulatory Impact Assessment accompanying the Employment Bill based on the advice given to applicants, namely that a weak case was one where applicants had been advised by a solicitor or non-legal adviser that they would lose the case if it went to a hearing.
Data on the advice given to applicants are available from the 1998 Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications. This suggests that there were between 2 and 4 per cent. of applications where the case either went to a hearing, was withdrawn within two weeks of the hearing date, or dismissed or disposed of in some other way and where the applicant was advised that they would lose the case at hearing (either by a solicitor or by a non-legal organisation such as a Citizens Advice Bureaus or a trade union). A range is given because not all applicants sought advice and, in some cases, conflicting advice was given by different sources. Applying these percentages to the 2000–01 level of applications would imply between 2,600 and 5,200 such cases.
This measure is based on cases where the applicant was advised they would lose the case at a hearing. In some of these cases, the tribunal may have upheld the application. On the other hand, these estimates do not include cases where there was a weak defence.
(b) Information on settlements does not identify cases which settle "close to the hearing date". Three quarters of cases settle or withdraw before the hearing, and ACAS conciliation leads to settlement in 38 per cent. of cases.