In the High Court Mr Justice Swift said in his judgment,
concerning CWU encouraging postal workers to take their voting papers from the
frames in the delivery centre and fill them out at work: “This was an interference that was accurately described
"Strike ballots should be postal ballots. Each voter
should receive a voting paper at home.
What CWU did was a form of subversion of the ballot
process. It was an interference with voting.”
The company brought legal action against the Communication Workers Union (CWU) after its members voted to back walkouts by 97% on a turnout of 76% last month.
But Royal Mail argued that the ballot had "potential irregularities" and was null and void.
During a hearing on Tuesday, Royal Mail claimed the union orchestrated a "de facto workplace ballot", contrary to rules on industrial action, to maximise the turnout and the "yes" vote.
CWU lawyers argued there was no evidence of interference with the ballot and that "legitimate partisan campaigning" by the union in favour of a "yes" vote did not violate the rules.
BreakingRoyal Mail strikes blocked
Royal Mail has won a High Court injunction against winter strikes planned by postal workers.
More as we get it.
Royal Mail dispute heading to High Court
BBC Radio 4
Royal Mail is going to the High Court this afternoon in a bid to stop a postal strike, which could disrupt deliveries in the run-up to the general election and Christmas.
Employment lawyer Jonathan Chamberlain, of Gowling WLG, told the Today programme: "They will be looking at very detailed and technical results
related to balloting.
"Unless a strike is properly balloted then a company can apply to court to stop it going ahead. Here the suggestion is that the ballot
wasn’t secret because ballot papers were being opened, and also that employees - perhaps union members - interfered with the balloting, and that’s prohibited under
Any ruling in Royal Mail's favour is more likely to delay the strike rather than get it called off permanently.
Mr Chamberlain added: "The wording is clear, there can’t be interference in the
ballot. But there is a general principle in English law that minor mistakes
shouldn’t overhaul the whole of an exercise such as this, so I imagine that in a
case like this it will be how widespread
this practice was.
can’t solve industrial disputes in the court. If the union got the balloting
wrong and these things occurred all they have to do is reballot and we will
have a strike later."