Report comment

The judgment is unusual to say the least, particularly keeping in mind that it's a Supreme Court judgment and that the respondent is the UK government.

Many of the arguments supporting the fees are treated very dismissively; there are parts that seem like it's explaining things to schoolchildren or students. For example, in response to an argument that ET cases are only important to those directly involved in them:

"...When, for example, Mrs Donoghue won her appeal to the
House of Lords (Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] AC 562), the decision established that producers of consumer goods are under a duty to take care for the health and safety of the consumers of those goods: one of the most important developments in the law of this country in the 20th century. To say that it was of no value to anyone other than Mrs Donoghue and the lawyers and judges involved in the case would be absurd."