Judgment: 2013-05-09 · Court archive

Supreme Court strikes down 1946 law allowing employment agreements to bind entire sectors

Supreme Court ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Labour Court
What

Supreme Court strikes down 1946 law allowing employment agreements to bind entire sectors

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Supreme Court
  • Labour Court
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Article 15.2.1 of the Constitution reserves the sole and exclusive power to make laws for the State to the Oireachtas. The court accepted that legislation may allow ministers or public bodies to fill in details within a framework already established by statute. But it held that Part III went much further.

The Supreme Court has struck down Part III of the Industrial Relations Act 1946, ruling that it gave private parties an unconstitutional power to make employment rules binding across entire industries.

The case arose from a Registered Employment Agreement governing electricians in the construction sector. Once registered by the Labour Court, such an agreement could set legally enforceable terms on pay and working conditions for all employers and workers in the sector, including people who had never agreed to it and had not been represented when it was negotiated.

The proceedings followed a long-running dispute involving electrical contractors who objected to being bound by the agreement. The litigation had become procedurally complicated, but the Supreme Court narrowed the appeal to the central constitutional question.

Article 15.2.1 of the Constitution reserves the sole and exclusive power to make laws for the State to the Oireachtas. The court accepted that legislation may allow ministers or public bodies to fill in details within a framework already established by statute. But it held that Part III went much further.

Mr Justice O’Donnell said the 1946 Act allowed private participants in an industry to make rules covering a very broad range of employment matters, including wages, pensions, hours, procedures and working arrangements. Once registered, those rules could be enforced against people who were not parties to the original agreement, including through criminal prosecution.

The Labour Court’s role did not cure the constitutional problem. Its statutory power was largely confined to deciding whether specified registration conditions were met, and the legislation did not provide sufficient principles or policies governing the content of the agreements.

The court described the scheme as a wholesale transfer, or abdication, of law-making authority rather than permissible subordinate regulation.

The appeal was therefore allowed and Part III of the 1946 Act was declared invalid under Article 15.2.1 of the Constitution.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review