EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appearance/response
Judge reviewing the rejection of a late-lodged ET3 (in accordance with Moroak v Cromie [2005] ICR 1226 and D and H Travel Ltd v Foster [2005] ICR 1537) failed to follow the approach in Kwik Save Stores v Swain [1997] ICR 49, as prescribed in this context by Pendragon Plc v Copus [2005] ICR 1671 – Applying the correct test, the ET3 should have been admitted.
Judges:
Underhill P J
Citations:
[2011] UKEAT 0068 – 11 – 2106
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.443640