The appellant had arranged to be represented at an industrial tribunal hearing by a trade union representative with whom he intended to travel to the hearing. However, unfortunately the union representative was unwell on the day of the hearing and unable to make the journey. The appellant himself set off on his own intending to conduct his own case but he was unable to complete the journey because of snow. He managed to get a message through to the tribunal telling the tribunal office that the trade union representative would not be appearing, and that he himself had problems getting there. He did not formally apply for an adjournment.
Held: The court overturned the decision of the industrial tribunal to proceed with the case in the absence of the appellant, because they said that the tribunal should have considered the telephone message as amounting to an application to adjourn, even though he had not asked expressly for an adjournment. The tribunal had refused to adjourn because there had been no express request for an adjournment. The exercise of discretion by a lower court may not be appealed in the absence of an error of law. In this case such an error was found.
Lord Parker CJ
[1968] 1 WLR 1478, [1968] 3 All ER 506
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Tokyo Diner Plc v S Matsumoto EAT 3-May-2001
The matter was due to come on for preliminary hearing. The respondent’s solicitor was summoned to a medical appointment only the evening before. She attended the tribunal, but left before the case was called on. There was a dispute as to whether . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 September 2021; Ref: scu.183461
