Employment Bill [HL]

However, before reaching any final conclusion on that point, I turn to Amendment No. 12, which would remove from the Bill the option for the regulations to provide that determinations without a hearing can be made where the parties are informed of their right to request a hearing, but that their consent to the process will be deemed if they do not exercise that right. Voices have expressed a firm view that that part of Clause 4 adds nothing. The regulations will be consulted on. The clause provides that rules can provide either for positive consent—that is clear in the Bill—or for deemed consent if a hearing is not requested. The Government received strong support for establishing an efficient but swift system for dealing with simple monetary claims, and are continuing to develop, in consultation with users of the system, a model which is both effective and accessible for all parties. The detail of how that system will be managed will be established through the tribunal rules, which are not before the Committee tonight. As such, it would be unwise and inconsistent with its objectives for this clause simply to limit the way in which tribunals may manage that process in future. The fast track will be an important and valuable mechanism for ensuring effective but expeditious determination of proceedings. To achieve that aim, we propose that, in a limited number of jurisdictions, an employment judge would write to the parties informing them of his or her view that their case would be suitable for determination on the basis of documents, but that they have a right to a hearing. If they do not write back and exercise that right, a written determination would be made. If any of the parties does request a hearing, of course the case will be heard before the tribunal in the normal way. The Government’s proposals address any concerns about access to justice by expressly qualifying existing legislation to specify that if either party wants a hearing, a hearing will take place as at present. I do not think that I could be clearer on that fundamental principle. The Government intend to consult interested parties before any revision of these tribunal rules take place. I assure the Committee that this will take account of views on how the tribunal should seek to establish the party’s consent to a determination without hearing. On that basis, I am prepared to consider acceptance of Amendment No. 11, providing that the option for the regulations to prescribe consent to determination without hearing should be in writing. I thank my noble friend Lady Turner for having raised the issue.