GOVERNMENT efforts to sabotage strikes by legalising the use of agency workers as scabs were stamped on by the High Court today.

In a damning judgement, Mr Justice Linden declared the new laws “so unfair as to be unlawful and, indeed, irrational.”

Unions hailed the decision as a “complete vindication” of their legal challenge to the legislation, which must now be dumped by the government.

The laws were approved by Kwasi Kwarteng on July 20 last year during his spell as business secretary under Boris Johnson’s premiership.

They took effect the following day, overturning a 40-year ban on agency workers replacing striking workers. 

Mr Kwarteng introduced the legislation without consulting trade unions and against the advice of his own aides.

In the ruling, Mr Justice Linden found that the government had acted unlawfully by not consulting the unions.

He also said that the then business secretary’s action was “indicative of Mr Kwarteng’s lack of interest in evidence or views about the impact and desirability of the proposal.”

The judge added that the decision had proceeded “at exceptional speed” despite an adviser expressing concerns about the effect on parliamentary scrutiny.

The new law was introduced as anger grew among public-sector workers and their unions over years of pay freezes and below-inflation rises, with a potential for increasingly widespread strike action.

The High Court challenge was mounted by 11 unions, co-ordinated by the TUC and represented by Thompsons Solicitors.

Richard Arthur of Thompsons said Mr Kwarteng “was driven solely by a political ideology to meet a self-imposed deadline to implement the regulations in the face of mounting industrial action across the country.

“He took this decision notwithstanding advice he received that it was likely to be counterproductive to the problem he wanted to address and was being rushed through without regard for the duty to consult, which was a fundamental legal requirement.” 

TUC general secretary Paul Nowak said: “This defeat is a badge of shame for the Conservatives, who have been found guilty of breaching the law.

“The government railroaded through this law change despite widespread opposition from agency employers and unions. 

“The courts even found ministers ignored evidence that the measure would be counterproductive.”

Mr Nowak argued that the same “reckless approach” lay behind the anti-strike Bill that seeks to enforce minimum levels of service during industrial action, which has been repeatedly challenged in the House of Lords.

Mr Nowak said the legislation “must be junked for good too.”

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “This is a total vindication for unions and workers. 

“The government’s decision to allow employers to recruit agency workers to undermine legal strike action was a cynical move to back their friends in business and weaken workers’ legal rights to withdraw their labour.”

She said that rather than weakening industrial action, “it has hardened attitudes and unnecessarily extended strikes.” 

Usdaw general secretary Paddy Lillis said: “It beggared belief that, in the midst of a cost-of-living emergency, the government engaged in ideological attacks on workers’ rights. 

“We can’t go on like this; it’s time for a change. We need a general election now.”

Unison general secretary Christina McAnea said: “To spare themselves future shame, ministers should ditch their ill-advised strikes Bill and focus instead on working with unions to solve the country’s many problems.” 

PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said: “This legislation has been condemned almost universally, including by employer organisations, who warned that it would worsen industrial disputes. The government refused to listen.” 

GMB legal director Jamie Hanley described the court ruling as “a victory for all workers,” adding that allowing bosses to bring in less qualified agency workers put the safety of the public at risk.

The Department for Business and Trade said: “We are disappointed with the High Court’s decision as we believed the decision to repeal the ban on agency workers covering strikes complied with our legal obligations.

“The ability to strike is important, but we maintain there needs to be a reasonable balance between this and the rights of businesses and the public.

“We will consider the judgement and next steps carefully.”