A costs order made by the tribunal under rule 78(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 was within its powers, even though it capped the costs in favour of the appellant (the respondent below) in an amount that had not yet been precisely ascertained. The tribunal had been entitled to have regard to … Continue reading Kuwait Oil Company (KSC) v Al-Tarkait (Practice and Procedure – Costs): EAT 4 Dec 2019
The Employment Tribunal dismissed the Claimant’s claims for discrimination, harassment, victimisation, whistleblowing detriment and unfair dismissal part of the way through the final hearing because he indicated that he was not prepared to give evidence or otherwise continue to participate in the proceedings, after the Tribunal ruled against his application to strike out the Respondent’s … Continue reading Leslie v Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (Practice and Procedure): EAT 7 Jan 2020
An order for disclosure under rule 31 of the 2013 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure can be made against a person who is not physically present in Great Britain at the time when the order is made. The words in rule 31: ‘[t]he Tribunal may order any person in Great Britain to disclose documents or … Continue reading Sarnoff v The Weinstein Company Llc (Practice and Procedure – Disclosure – Case Management): EAT 6 May 2020
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – appearance/striking-out The Claimant was represented by her husband, who is not legally qualified. They attended and participated in a Preliminary Hearing, at which an ET considered whether the Claimant’s claims had no, or little reasonable prospect of success, and allowed them to proceed without making a deposit order. The Claimant was … Continue reading Dimitriu v Testerworld Ltd (T/A De Pharmaceutical) (Practice and Procedure – Appearance/Striking-Out): EAT 16 Jan 2020
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Striking-out / dismissal PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Imposition of deposit Rules 37(1) and 39(1) Schedule 1 Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 The Employment Tribunal (‘ET’) had struck out the Claimant’s claim of protected disclosure detriments and dismissal as having no reasonable prospect of success. In the alternative, the ET … Continue reading Arthur v Hertfordshire Partnership University NS Foundation Trust (Practice and Procedure Striking-Out : Dismissal): EAT 13 Aug 2019
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Whistleblowing VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosure The Appellant’s whistleblowing claim was dismissed by the Employment Tribunal in 2012. Her application dated 7 September 2012 for a review under Rule 34(3) of the 2004 Rules was permitted to proceed to a hearing in … Continue reading Clarke v Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Health Board (Practice and Procedure): EAT 15 May 2017
EAT Appeal from Registrar’s Order – whether the appeal was in time The appeal raised two questions: (1) Whether the Employment Tribunal’s re-issue of the Judgment under a certificate of correction meant that time began to run from the when the re-issued Judgment was sent out? If so, the appeal had been served in time. … Continue reading Majekodunmi v City Facilities Management Uk Ltd and Others (Practice and Procedure: Time for Appealing): EAT 25 Sep 2015
EAT 1. The Employment Judge had jurisdiction to consider an extant RRO notwithstanding the fact that the claims had been withdrawn on settlement. The Employment Tribunal was not functus as the Appellants sought to argue. 2. Nor did the RRO expire automatically upon withdrawal. Rule 50(1) of the 2013 Rules permits RROs that are wider … Continue reading CA, RA, RB and RC v News Group Newspapers Ltd (Practice and Procedure: Restricted Reporting Order): EAT 13 May 2016
The claimant’s appeals against two decisions of the Employment Tribunal, made in different proceedings brought against the respondent, were heard together. In the first appeal, the claimant challenged the Employment Tribunal’s refusal to reconsider its earlier judgment dismissing the respondent’s application to strike out three claims brought by the claimant. The Employment Appeal Tribunal held … Continue reading Ameyaw v Pricewaterhousecoopers Services Ltd (Practice and Procedure; Victimisation; Unfair Dismissal): EAT 3 Nov 2021
EAT Practice and Procedure : Striking-Out/Dismissal – An appeal to this Tribunal is an opportunity for a litigant to ask for a further view to be taken of his claim but it is subject to procedural rules so as to enable this Tribunal to deal not just with that appeal but with a large number … Continue reading Chauhan v DDG Windows: EAT 28 Oct 2013
EAT Practice and Procedure : Admissibility of Evidence – The Employment Judge had misdirected herself on the ‘without prejudice’ rule. She had looked only in the correspondence itself for an actual ‘dispute’ and by failing to consider the factual matrix in which the correspondence arose she had misdirected herself by excluding the possibility of ‘a … Continue reading Portnykh v Nomura International Plc: EAT 5 Nov 2013
EAT Practice and Procedure : Striking-Out/Dismissal An appeal to this Tribunal is an opportunity for a litigant to ask for a further view to be taken of his claim but it is subject to procedural rules so as to enable this Tribunal to deal not just with that appeal but with a large number of … Continue reading Chauhan v DDG Windows: EAT 5 Dec 2013
Third Party Anonymity Order rights before ET The Appellant appealed the refusal of her application under Rule 50 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 for an order that her name be redacted or anonymised in an earlier judgment in unfair and wrongful dismissal proceedings brought by two of her relatives. She had also … Continue reading TYU v ILA SPA Ltd: EAT 16 Sep 2021
Practice and procedure – rule 50(1) schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 The respondents made an application under rule 50(1) schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 (‘the ET Rules’) to prohibit the disclosure of information relating to specified matters on the … Continue reading Millicom Service UK Ltd and Others v Clifford: EAT 11 May 2022
Counsel appearing at the tribunal had previously sat as a judge with a tribunal member. The opposing party asserted bias in the tribunal. Held: The test in Gough should be restated in part so that the court must first ascertain all the circumstances which have a bearing on the suggestion that the judge was biased. … Continue reading Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited: HL 19 Jun 2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – A Tribunal does not necessarily err in law if it proceeds with a hearing and makes findings of fact adverse to a respondent where a claimant does not attend and is not available for cross examination. Rules 14 and 27 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure considered. Judges: Richardson J … Continue reading Duffy v George: EAT 19 Oct 2012
EAT (Practice and Procedure) 1. While there is no express power provided by the ETA 1996 or the 2013 Rules made under it, the appointment of a litigation friend is within the power to make a case management order in the 2013 Rules as a procedural matter in a case where otherwise a litigant who … Continue reading Jhuti v Royal Mail Group Ltd and Others: EAT 31 Jul 2017
Sex Discrimination — Burden of ProofThe liability judgment The ET did not err in law in dismissing the Claimant’s complaints of unlawful discrimination, victimisation and harassment. In one respect – relating to the ET’s reasoning concerning the burden of proof – the EAT’s decision is by a majority, Mr Hunter dissenting – see paragraphs 61-76. … Continue reading Solomon v University of Hertfordshire and Another: EAT 29 Oct 2019
A claim had been brought alleging discrimination. The parties had been anonymised. An order had been made for only a redacted form of the judgment to be published. The claimant appealed, saying that it should be redacted. Citations: [2019] EWCA Civ 1417 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Tribunals Act 1996 10, Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules … Continue reading L v Q Ltd: CA 9 Aug 2019
UNFAIR DISMISSAL HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Restricted reporting order Appeal against a decision to revoke an Anonymisation Order made at a final hearing. The Appellant worked for and was dismissed by a Probation Trust. At an early stage of her employment she had a relationship with a young man who … Continue reading A v The Secretary of State for Justice: EAT 13 Mar 2018
The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed. Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment tribunal decision. It did not look to see whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal had erred … Continue reading Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2): CA 20 Dec 2002
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE In 2009 the Claimant/Appellant presented complaints of unfair dismissal, race discrimination and victimisation against her former employers (the Trust). The claims were dismissed in February 2011. In March 2011 she presented claims against the Respondent Unison, her former union, alleging race victimisation and detrimental treatment by its representative in … Continue reading Oni v Unison Trade Union: EAT 5 Feb 2018
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Imposition of deposit Deposit Order – Rule 39 Employment Tribunal Rules 2013 The Claimant had pursued claims of disability discrimination under sections 13 (direct discrimination) and 15 (discrimination because of something arising in consequence of disability) Equality Act 2010 (‘EqA’). At a Preliminary Hearing listed to determine time limit issues, … Continue reading Tree v South East Coastal Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust: EAT 4 Jul 2017
In the course of unfair dismissal proceedings, the defendant had disclosed possession of confidential materials of his former employer. The employer began these proceedings based on the materials. Only at a later point when he appointed solicitors was a challenge to made to that use as contempt. The company now appealed against the strike out … Continue reading IG Index Ltd v Cloete: CA 31 Jul 2014
EAT Practice and Procedure: Appellate Jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke – UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Constructive dismissal Reasons The simplification of the wording of the Rule relating to the content of the Reasons (i.e. the change from Rule 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 to Rule 62(5) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules … Continue reading Vairea v Reed Business Information Ltd: EAT 3 Jun 2016
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Reasonableness of dismissal PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Review Dishonesty The concept of subjective dishonesty did not mean that the Employment Judge was bound to consider the approach taken in John Lewis plc v Coyne [2001] IRLR 139, which stated that, where an issue arose as … Continue reading Gondalia v Tesco Stores Ltd (Unfair Dismissal : Reasonableness of Dismissal): EAT 20 Jan 2015
amwell_dogherty The claimant had secretly recorded the disciplinary hearings and also the deliberations of the disciplinary panel after their retirement. The tribunal had at a case management hearing admitted the recordings as evidence, and the defendant appealed, saying also that it had been disclosed too late. Held: The evidence contained in the recordings was relevant … Continue reading Amwell View School v Dogherty: EAT 15 Sep 2006
Conditions for new evidence on appeal At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for a retrial. Held: The Court of Appeal refused to … Continue reading Ladd v Marshall: CA 29 Nov 1954
(Grand Chamber) The applicants had been subjected to severe restrictions. They were foreign nationals suspected of terrorist involvement, but could not be deported for fear of being tortured. The UK had derogated from the Convention to put the restrictions in place. Assurances had been given by the home nations that on return they would not … Continue reading A and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Feb 2009
No power in ET to remove record from Register PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Restricted reporting order PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Case management Practice and Procedure – Case Management – Restricted Reporting Order/Anonymity – Rule 50 ET Rules 2013 The Appellant applied for an earlier ET Judgment in the proceedings (sent out to the parties and … Continue reading Ameyaw v Pricewaterhousecoopers Services Ltd: EAT 4 Jan 2019
This is a continuation of the list of significant recent cases on our front page. As a most recent case pushes its way to the top, the last on teh front page falls into here. Newest significant cases.
We index legal judgments (283 thousand cases) for lawyers, students, and litigants in the UK. We link to many full judgments, and we add citations, summaries and cross references as appropriate and available. Earlier recent cases Lex vobiscum (May the Law be with You – swarb.co.uk); pax vobiscum (May Peace be with You – The … Continue reading May the Law be with You – Lex Vobiscum
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
