Push-Button Access to Justice: When Easier Filing Overwhelms Tribunals

# Summary

# Why friction matters in dispute design

The practical point: remove sludge that blocks legitimate claims, and retain or add "speed bumps" that discourage harmful or low-merit uses of the system.

# How automation changed the filing landscape

New automated drafting tools reduce the time and cognitive work needed to create a complaint or interim application. Where previously claimants had to draft their case with care, now a few keystrokes can produce a submission. That changes claimant behavior in two ways:

• It lowers the perceived cost of filing, increasing the volume of applications.
• It reduces the time for deliberation, producing filings that may be poorly articulated or strategically opportunistic.

This dynamic encourages a "what do I have to lose?" mindset: submit the application because the effort is minimal, even if the chances of success are low.

# Why interim relief is special

Given the effect of interim orders, most applications historically fail that test. A surge of applications driven by automated drafting tools strained tribunal resources without producing many meritorious outcomes.

# Tribunal response and the role of guidance

Faced with a "significant increase" in interim applications, often associated with automated drafting, Employment Tribunals issued new guidance to manage the problem. The guidance reiterates the high threshold for interim relief and provides practical direction to gatekeeping judges about screening and case management.

The guidance aims to rebalance access: preserve the ability of deserving claimants to seek urgent relief while deterring high volumes of low-merit applications that clog the system.

# Practical implications for litigants and administrators

• Claimants: Expect scrutiny of interim relief applications and prepare to show a strong likelihood of success on the merits. Speed of filing is no substitute for a substantive case.
• Representatives and advisers: Help clients understand costs beyond money — the reputational and procedural consequences of impulsive filings.
• Courts and tribunals: Consider procedural steps that add meaningful deliberation without reintroducing barriers for valid claimants. Examples include stricter initial screening, mandatory short statements of grounds, or a small non-monetary time cost that encourages reflection.

# Bottom line