Refusal of Andy Green to step down – Proceedings for Injunctive relief lodged at the High Court.
As Unite colleagues will be aware the Unite Executive Council voted to remove the former EC Chair Andy Green from his position at a meeting held on the 10th of March 2025.
The vote to remove Andy Green was carried by 31 votes in favour, 28 against, and 1 abstention.
Regrettably, Andy Green has persistently refused to step down from his position despite numerous requests for him to end the crisis and accept the outcome of the vote. He continues to reject the democratic will of the Unite EC and is frustrating the good and proper running of the Union.
As a result of this impasse the Unite EC were forced to seek legal advice, during which it became apparent that Unite General Secretary Sharon Graham had engaged an extremely expensive external law firm to defend Andy Green in his attempt to thwart the majority democratic will of the EC that voted to remove him as the Chair of the Unite EC on 10th March 2025.
The law firm engaged by Sharon Graham is Farrer & Co. The Unite EC find it reprehensible that the Unite General Secretary is prepared to pay vast sums of members money to enable Andy Green to evade the authority and democratic will of the Unite EC.
Solicitors engaged by the Unite EC wrote to Andy Green to invite him to step aside to prevent legal action being taken against him to ensure compliance with the EC’s democratic decision to remove him.
In addition, a letter was sent by the Unite EC yesterday, Thursday the 3rd of April 2025, to Unite General Secretary Sharon Graham making it clear that the Executive Council has revoked her authority to authorise legal action (full text of letter reproduced below).
The Unite EC wishes to assure Unite members, activists, staff, and officers, that we will not flinch from our duty as EC members to ensure democratic control, financial transparency, and good governance of our union, nor will we allow the authority of the EC to be trampled on and marginalised.
Legal action to safeguard Unite’s democracy and financial stability has now commenced at the High Court and we will not rest until our union is firmly back under the rightful and proper democratic control of its members.
Letter sent to Sharon Graham from the Unite EC majority
Dear Sharon Graham,
We, the undersigned members of the Executive Council of Unite the Union, write to you in our collective capacity as a majority of the governing body of theUnion, as defined under Rule14.9 of the Union’s Rule Book.
We understand that you may be relying upon the delegated authority in Rule 14.11 to instruct solicitors and counsel to take legal action on behalf of the Union in support of Mr Green.
We wish to be clear that:
You are hereby instructed not to initiate any legal proceedings or instruct external solicitors in the name of the Union in relation to the vote of 10 March 2025 to remove Mr Green as the Chair of the Executive Council or to take action to support Mr Green’s position.
This instruction is issued on the following basis:
- Rule 15.S makes clear that the General Secretary must act under the control of and in accordance with the directions of the Executive Council. This is such a direction.
- Rule 14.9 vests the government, management, and control of the Union collectively in the Executive Council. This includes decisions regarding legal action and representation.
- Rule 14.11 does not override the EC’s authority, and any delegation of power to the General Secretary under that clause is conditional and revocable by the Executive Council.
furthermore, given that the Executive Council has resolved to remove its Chair, your continued unilateral action is ultra vires, and contrary to the Union’s good governance.
For the avoidance of doubt:
(i) given the vote that was taken on 10 March 2025, we consider that properly understood you had no authority to instruct solicitors on behalf of the Union to defend Mr Green’s position and to seek to advance an argument that the vote was not effective because it is perfectly obvious that Executive Council had by its vote revoked any such authority. Further, acting contrary to that vote was acting contrary to the decision of the Executive Council and the interests of the Union.
{ii) tf contrary to this, you did have such authority it is hereby revoked.
We trust you will respect the constitutional structure of the Union and comply with this instruction immediately.
Finally, Cole Khan Solicitors LLP notified Farrar & Co. LLP yesterday that the Executive Committee have instructed Cole Khan Solicitors LLP to bring proceedings in the Union’s name against Mr Green.
