Kalpana Kalpana (Editor)

Henry v London Greater Transport Services

Updated on
Share on FacebookTweet on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Reddit
Decided  22 March 2001
End date  March 22, 2001
Citation(s)  [2002] EWCA Civ 488
Henry v London Greater Transport Services

Ruling court  Court of Appeal of England and Wales

Henry v London Greater Transport Services Ltd [2002] EWCA 488 is a UK labour law case concerning the scope of protection for people to employment rights. It took the view that an employment contract requires



The Transport and General Workers Union negotiated with a management buy-out (via share transfer) prospector for a collective agreement that would mean less pay and worse conditions for members. 63 members, including Mr Carlton Henry, objected. The other 1500 agreed to it. The 63 claimed for unlawful wage deductions under ERA 1996 s 13. Had their contracts been varied by collective agreement, in absence of an express incorporation clause in their contracts? There had been no ballot, which was workplace custom, so the 63 argued that there was no incorporation.

Mr S Juss represented the workers. The Employment Tribunal upheld the claim of the 63, and by continuing to work for 2 years under protest, they had never consented. However the Employment Appeal Tribunal allowed the employer’s appeal, but remitted to trial whether a ballot was in fact reasonable, certain and notorious.


Pill LJ rejected the employees’ appeal. It said, first, that the tribunal had not justified its conclusion that the employees had not consented by working normally for two years. Second, it needed to be asked whether it was customary – as well as a collective agreement with a ballot binding the workforce – if a collective agreement without a ballot could bind the workforce.

Longmore LJ and Sir Martin Nourse agreed.


Henry v London Greater Transport Services Wikipedia