Being pedantic or paying attention to detail? You decide. I know what I mean, and if you don't want to see that, that's up to you. I stand by my postings and my research.
If Unite is planning on heading straight to the European courts, they might want to consider this (sent to me by somebody else, so haven't had a chance to check for accuracy):
Unite cannot go to ECoHR direct. It's a requirement to have exhausted all domestic legal stages before a case will be entertained. Also, ECoHR only hears cases against States. So if Unite ended up having to go to ECoHR, the case would have to be against the UK for having laws non-compliant with ECoHR. If they then win, they then have to wait for the government to amend UK legislation to bring into line. Then BA can say they're not covered by the specific piece of legislation and force another challenge through the UK legal system.
As for timelines, ECoHR guidance states that: "
The Court endeavours to deal with cases within three years after they are brought, but the examination of some cases can take longer and some can be processed more rapidly.". Worth noting that ECoHR gets over 30,000 new applications every year
.