| dbo:abstract
|
- London Underground Ltd v National Union of Railwaymen, Maritime and Transport Staff [1996] ICR 170 is a UK labour law case, concerning the right to strike. The case is also notable as Millett LJ stated in the course of his judgment that: It would be astonishing if a right which was first conferred by Parliament in 1906, which has been enjoyed by trade unions ever since and which is today recognised as encompassing a fundamental human right, should have been removed by Parliament by enacting a series of provisions intended to strengthen industrial democracy and governing the relations between a union and its own members. (en)
|
| dbo:wikiPageID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 9492 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:citations
| |
| dbp:court
| |
| dbp:judges
|
- Butler-Sloss LJ, Millett LJ and Ward LJ (en)
|
| dbp:keywords
|
- Right to strike, fundamental human right, balloting (en)
|
| dbp:name
|
- London Underground Ltd v RMT (en)
|
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dcterms:subject
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- London Underground Ltd v National Union of Railwaymen, Maritime and Transport Staff [1996] ICR 170 is a UK labour law case, concerning the right to strike. The case is also notable as Millett LJ stated in the course of his judgment that: (en)
|
| rdfs:label
|
- London Underground Ltd v National Union of Railwaymen, Maritime and Transport Staff (en)
|
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
