Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales), ex parte Public Concern at Work: QBD 9 May 2000

The Central Office of Tribunals must record the particulars of Employment Tribunal decisions. It has in the past recorded the existence of the application but no details. The court held that the register must include details of the parties, the particulars of the allegations made, and the full text of the decision where recorded. The … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales), ex parte Public Concern at Work: QBD 9 May 2000

Millicom Service UK Ltd and Others v Clifford: EAT 11 May 2022

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

Iqra Community Primary School v Mansur (Whistleblowing : Protected Disclosure): EAT 5 Nov 2020

An Employment Tribunal erred by permitting the Claimant to amend her claim to add new allegations of whistleblowing detriment and by listing a final hearing without notice to the Respondent, in a case where the Respondent had made no response to the claim. The amendment decision was made without sufficient consideration of the guidance in … Continue reading Iqra Community Primary School v Mansur (Whistleblowing : Protected Disclosure): EAT 5 Nov 2020

Leslie v Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (Practice and Procedure): EAT 7 Jan 2020

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

Transport for London v O’Cathail: CA 29 Jan 2013

The court considered an appeal against a refusal of a late application for an adjournment by an employment tribunal. Held: The appeal was allowed. There had been no error of law in the decisions of the ET to refuse adjournments either in its approach in principle to the exercise of the ET’s discretion or in … Continue reading Transport for London v O’Cathail: CA 29 Jan 2013

Spring v First Capital East Ltd: EAT 20 Jul 2012

EAT Practice and Procedure : Imposition of Deposit – Employment Tribunal ordered that Claimant pay a deposit of andpound;250 as a condition of being permitted to continue to take part in proceedings relating to his claim that he was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against on grounds of age.Appeal dismissed.(1) Rule 18(2) of Schedule 1 to … Continue reading Spring v First Capital East Ltd: EAT 20 Jul 2012

Atkin v The Grove Primary School and Another: EAT 15 Nov 2001

The claimant had been dismissed for gross misconduct. As a teacher he had drunk alcohol at school, and taken a bottle of wine. His complaint of unfair dismissal had been dismissed, and he appealed that decision, saying the school had departed from proper procedures, that the panels had been chosen in contravention of procedures, and … Continue reading Atkin v The Grove Primary School and Another: EAT 15 Nov 2001

Husband v Durham Police Authority: EAT 20 Dec 2002

When to reverse a previous decision by means of a Review undertaken pursuant to paragraph 13(1)(e) of Schedule 1 to the 2001 Regulations. Judges: Wall J Citations: [2002] UKEAT 1201 – 01 – 2012 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2001 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 31 October 2022; … Continue reading Husband v Durham Police Authority: EAT 20 Dec 2002

Ansar v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc and others: CA 9 Oct 2006

The claimant challenged a decision of the chairman of the Employment tribunal not to recuse himself on a later hearing after the claimant had previously made allegations of bias and improper conduct against him. Judges: Waller LJ, Laws LJ, Leveson LJ Citations: [2006] EWCA Civ 1462, [2007] IRLR 211, [2006] ICR 1565 Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading Ansar v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc and others: CA 9 Oct 2006

Arrowsmith v Nottingham Trent University: CA 10 Jun 2011

The claimant appealed against an order for costs made against her after rejection of her employment claim.Daleside lays down no point of principle of general application; that where a party lies about a central allegation in the case an award of costs must follow. Each case will be fact-sensitive. Judges: Laws, Richards, Rimer LJJ Citations: … Continue reading Arrowsmith v Nottingham Trent University: CA 10 Jun 2011

Sivagnansundarum v Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust: EAT 28 Jun 2011

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-BarkeAlthough this was a ‘narrative’ judgment sufficient substance could be extracted from the decision to demonstrate compliance with rule 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 SI No. 1861; Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd v Wilcox [2006] EWCA Civ 1240, [2007] IRLR 63, Greenwood … Continue reading Sivagnansundarum v Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust: EAT 28 Jun 2011

Kudjodji v Lidl Ltd: EAT 25 May 2011

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Preliminary issuesJURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Claim in time and effective date of terminationEmployment Tribunal declared that it had jurisdiction to consider a claim for unfair dismissal, rejecting arguments that time grounds excluded it. On review, it upheld this decision. A decision was made under rule 28 ET Procedure Rules. A subsequent … Continue reading Kudjodji v Lidl Ltd: EAT 25 May 2011

Joes v The City and County of Swansea: EAT 5 May 2011

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Compensation The decisions to apportion compensation, not to award any future loss after April 2008 and to apply an ‘uplift’ of 25% in respect of breach of statutory procedures were neither irrational, nor without evidential foundation nor based on any misdirection and the appeal would be dismissed. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – … Continue reading Joes v The City and County of Swansea: EAT 5 May 2011

Greenwood v NWF Retail Ltd: EAT 18 Feb 2011

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke An Employment Tribunal decision must comply in both form and substance with 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 SI No. 1861 and failure to do so will amount to an error of law; Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd v Wilcox [2006] EWCA … Continue reading Greenwood v NWF Retail Ltd: EAT 18 Feb 2011

Norman and Another v NWF Retail Ltd: EAT 18 Feb 2011

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke An Employment Tribunal decision must comply in both form and substance with 30(6) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 SI No. 1861 and failure to do so will amount to an error of law; Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd v Wilcox [2006] EWCA … Continue reading Norman and Another v NWF Retail Ltd: EAT 18 Feb 2011

Crofts and others v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and others: CA 19 May 2005

The claimants were airline pilots employed by the respondent company with headquarters in Hong Kong. The court was asked whether an English Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear their complaints of unfair dismissal. Held: The pilots were employed in England so as to allow a claim for unfair dismissal here. Judges: Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, … Continue reading Crofts and others v Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd and others: CA 19 May 2005

Pervez v Macquarie Bank Ltd (London Branch) and Another: EAT 8 Dec 2010

EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Working outside the jurisdiction Claimant employed by a Hong Kong company – Seconded from Hong Kong to work in London for associated company – Claims for unfair dismissal, discrimination on the grounds of race and/or religious belief, and unlawful deduction of wages – Tribunal holds that it has no jurisdiction by … Continue reading Pervez v Macquarie Bank Ltd (London Branch) and Another: EAT 8 Dec 2010

Ironopolis Film Co Ltd and Others v Fox: EAT 7 May 2009

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Striking-out/dismissal The Employment Judge through the Tribunal Office wrongly informed the second, third and fourth Respondents that they could not take any action in the proceedings other to seek a review. When striking out the responses under the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 Schedule I Rule 18(7) … Continue reading Ironopolis Film Co Ltd and Others v Fox: EAT 7 May 2009

Bright v Group Taxibus Ltd: EAT 23 Jan 2009

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: CostsNo evidence or submissions were addressed to the Employment Judge as to any considerations to be taken into account under Rule 41(2) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 in considering whether to and if so in what amount to make a costs order. Such points cannot … Continue reading Bright v Group Taxibus Ltd: EAT 23 Jan 2009

Care First Partnership Ltd v Chubb and others: EAT 12 Jul 2000

A short but not unimportant point about the extent of the powers of an Employment Tribunal under the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 Judges: Keene J Citations: [2000] UKEAT 830 – 00 – 1207 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 Employment Updated: 13 July 2022; … Continue reading Care First Partnership Ltd v Chubb and others: EAT 12 Jul 2000

The Polygon Corporation v Tregunna: EAT 14 Nov 2001

The claimant alleged unfair dismissal. The respondent failed to enter a response within the period required, and was refused an extension of time. It appealed that refusal, saying the tribunal had failed to allow for the factors enumerated in the Kwik Save case. The respondent claimed those guidelines had been superceded by the newer rules. … Continue reading The Polygon Corporation v Tregunna: EAT 14 Nov 2001

Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd and Another v Wilcox and others: CA 20 Jul 2006

Rule 30(6) of the 2004 Rules, which requires sufficient reasons, is intended to be a guide and not a straitjacket so that if it can be reasonably spelled out from a determination that what the rule requires has been provided by the Tribunal, then no error of law will have been committed. Judges: Buxton LJ, … Continue reading Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd and Another v Wilcox and others: CA 20 Jul 2006

Prakash v Wolverhampton City Council: EAT 1 Sep 2006

EAT The Claimant was employed on a fixed term contract. During the terms of the contract he was dismissed for misconduct and made an application to the Employment Tribunal (ET) claiming unfair dismissal. He appealed but the appeal was heard after the date when the contract would have expired by effluxion of time. The appeal … Continue reading Prakash v Wolverhampton City Council: EAT 1 Sep 2006

Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust: CA 27 Jul 2006

Does an Employment Tribunal have jurisdiction to set aside a notice of withdrawal of a claim given under rule 25(2) of the 2004 Regulations? Held: Once a notice of withdrawal of a claim was served the employment tribunals had no jurisdiction to set it aside. The rules were lamentably drafted, but the decision was correct. … Continue reading Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust: CA 27 Jul 2006

Dafiaghor-Olomu v Community Integrated Care: EAT 1 Jun 2022

Unfair Dismissal, Practice and Procedure – The EAT considered the meaning of s. 124(5) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and concluded that payments to account should be deducted from the overall award before the applying the statutory cap even if that meant that the employer did not get any benefit from payments to account. … Continue reading Dafiaghor-Olomu v Community Integrated Care: EAT 1 Jun 2022

D Holc-Gale v Makers UK Ltd: EAT 30 Nov 2005

EAT Practice and Procedure – 2002 Act and pre-action requirements. Regulation 14 2004 Regulations; excluding discrimination Questionnaires from definition of statutory grievance. When failure to comply with SGP may be raised. Whether SGP requirement offends European Law.The Regulations cannot be circumvented by contending that the grievance identified in the preamble to the questions can be … Continue reading D Holc-Gale v Makers UK Ltd: EAT 30 Nov 2005

Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd Interserve Industrial Services Ltd v C Wilcox and 6 others A Seymour and 18 others I M Realisation Ltd (In Administration): EAT 2 Nov 2005

EAT Transfer of Undertakings: Consultation and Other Information; Transfer Practice and Procedure: Appellate Jurisdiction Nature of ‘undertaking’ for the purposes of TUPE: could there be a stable economic entity arising out of work done under contract where the contract could be terminated at will or others brought in to do the work in substitution? Could … Continue reading Balfour Beatty Power Networks Ltd Interserve Industrial Services Ltd v C Wilcox and 6 others A Seymour and 18 others I M Realisation Ltd (In Administration): EAT 2 Nov 2005

Ibrahim v Ethnic Minority Enterprise Centre and others: EAT 18 May 2005

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs – Case management – Claim for disability discrimination and breach of contract. Preliminary hearing at which claimants’ solicitors found liable in expenses and pre hearing review fixed under Rule 7 of Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2001. Claimant appealed against both … Continue reading Ibrahim v Ethnic Minority Enterprise Centre and others: EAT 18 May 2005

Bennett v London Borough of Southwark: CA 21 Feb 2002

Mrs Bennet was employed by the respondent. She had made complaints of race and sex discrimination. She was then dismissed, and claimed this was victimisation. Part way through the hearing, her representative failed in an application for an adjournment, and said that if he had been white, his application would have been granted. The tribunal … Continue reading Bennett v London Borough of Southwark: CA 21 Feb 2002

Sarnoff v YZ: CA 15 Jan 2021

Whether the Employment Tribunal had power to make an order for disclosure against a party who was not in Great Britain. Judges: Lord Justice Underhill Citations: [2021] EWCA Civ 26 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 27 June 2022; Ref: scu.657297

Serco Ltd v Lawson and Foreign and Commonwealth Office: CA 23 Jan 2004

The applicant had been employed to provide services to RAF in the Ascension Islands. He alleged constructive dismissal. There was an issue as to whether somebody working in the Ascension Islands was protected by the 1996 Act. The restriction on jurisdiction in s196 had been removed. The question now was as to what test applied … Continue reading Serco Ltd v Lawson and Foreign and Commonwealth Office: CA 23 Jan 2004

Matheson v Mazars Solutions Ltd: EAT 16 Dec 2003

EAT Practice and Procedure – Application. The application had been presented timeously at the ET in Edinburgh, but was out of time when retransmitted to Glasgow. The tribunal had found the Edinburgh office to be an area office, and not a regional office and therefore the application was not accepted within the Regulations. The appellant … Continue reading Matheson v Mazars Solutions Ltd: EAT 16 Dec 2003

X v Commissioner Metropolitan Police Service: EAT 29 Jan 2003

The claimant appealed against refusal of a Restricted Reporting Order, refused by the ET saying that it had had no jurisdiction to make one. Judges: Burton P J Citations: [2003] UKEAT 960 – 01 – 2901, [2003] ICR 1031, [2003] IRLR 415 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2001 Employment … Continue reading X v Commissioner Metropolitan Police Service: EAT 29 Jan 2003

Rothschild Asset Management Limited v Ako: CA 1 Mar 2002

The applicant had, in earlier proceedings before the Employment Tribunal, withdrawn issues she had raised. She now sought to pursue them, and the respondent asserted that she was estopped from doing so, and that the matter was res judicata. The chairman, having received a letter withdrawing the case, had entered the decision without hearing from … Continue reading Rothschild Asset Management Limited v Ako: CA 1 Mar 2002

General Council of the Bar v Miriki: CA 21 Dec 2001

The applicant claimed that the respondent Council had discriminated against her. After complicated applications, leave to appeal was granted on limited grounds, but on appeal the applicant had been allowed to extend that appeal. Held: An appeal tribunal might use its case management powers to allow limited departure from the permitted grounds of appeal, only … Continue reading General Council of the Bar v Miriki: CA 21 Dec 2001

C Maloney v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham; C Whatford; Governing Body of Hammersmith School and D A Williams: CA 7 May 1999

The claimant sought damages from the respondents. The case was listed to be heard over 25 days, but she sought an adjournment because of her own ill health. She appealed a refusal of the adjournment. The adjournment was refused on several grounds, including the great age of the action, and the need for a speedy … Continue reading C Maloney v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham; C Whatford; Governing Body of Hammersmith School and D A Williams: CA 7 May 1999

Clapson v British Airways Plc: EAT 12 Jan 2001

The employment tribunal power to require attendance by a witness includes the power to require a party to attend to give evidence. The consent of either party was not needed for its exercise. Citations: Times 21-Feb-2001, [2001] UKEAT 1266 – 00 – 1201 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1996 … Continue reading Clapson v British Airways Plc: EAT 12 Jan 2001

Care First Partnership Ltd v Roffey and Others: CA 22 Nov 2000

An employment tribunal had no power to dismiss a claim as without a reasonable prospect of success before it was begun to be heard. The power to regulate its own hearings did not include such a power, and the power to dismiss a claim as frivolous or vexatious, or for failure to comply with directions … Continue reading Care First Partnership Ltd v Roffey and Others: CA 22 Nov 2000

Office Equipment Systems Ltd v Hughes: CA 1 Aug 2018

The case had been decide on the basis of the papers after the employer had failed to submit a response. It now appealed against a refusal to allow them to be heard as to the assessment of damages. Held: The appeal succeeded. The tribunal should apply the practice which apply in standard civil claims. Judges: … Continue reading Office Equipment Systems Ltd v Hughes: CA 1 Aug 2018

Jones v The Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills: EAT 29 Jun 2017

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity Rule 60, read with Rules 1(3), 32 and 92 of the procedural rules applying in Employment Tribunals (in Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013) did not, at least in this case, justify the Tribunal not sending a witness … Continue reading Jones v The Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills: EAT 29 Jun 2017

Swissport Ltd v Exley and Others (Transfer of Undertakings): EAT 13 Jun 2017

EAT TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS – Economic technical or organisational reason PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Costs UNFAIR DISMISSAL – Polkey deduction The Respondent resisted claims for unfair dismissal following the loss of a ground handling contract at an airport. Grounds of resistance to ‘ordinary’ unfair dismissal claims were struck out. Economic technical or organisational (‘ETO’) and … Continue reading Swissport Ltd v Exley and Others (Transfer of Undertakings): EAT 13 Jun 2017

Abaya v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust: EAT 1 Mar 2017

EAT Practice and Procedure : Costs The Appellant brought claims in the Employment Tribunal for constructive unfair dismissal, racial discrimination and victimisation. The Employment Tribunal dismissed all the claims. The Respondent applied for its costs. The Employment Tribunal found that the unfair dismissal claim had not been one that had no reasonable prospect of success. … Continue reading Abaya v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust: EAT 1 Mar 2017

Office Equipment Systems Ltd v Hughes: EAT 22 Dec 2016

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appearance/response PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Case management PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Schedule 1, Rules 20 and 21 – Employment Tribunal refusing to allow the Respondent’s application for an extension of time to lodge its response to the ET claim … Continue reading Office Equipment Systems Ltd v Hughes: EAT 22 Dec 2016

Pugh v RT Electrics Ltd: EAT 6 Sep 2016

EAT Practice and Procedure : Estoppel or Abuse of Process PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Review The Claimant had brought a number of claims against his employer, the Respondent. A Preliminary Hearing had been fixed to determine all issues of time bar raised by the Respondent. An Employment Tribunal decided that one of the claims (Claim … Continue reading Pugh v RT Electrics Ltd: EAT 6 Sep 2016

Vairea v Reed Business Information Ltd: EAT 3 Jun 2016

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

The Practice Surgeries Ltd v Surrey Primary Care Trust (Now Secretary of State for Health): EAT 26 Feb 2016

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Withdrawal PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Review In 2011 the Claimant withdrew his claim before the Employment Tribunal. As was required by the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004, within the time limit for doing so the Respondents applied for the claim to be dismissed. After a further … Continue reading The Practice Surgeries Ltd v Surrey Primary Care Trust (Now Secretary of State for Health): EAT 26 Feb 2016

Duhoe v Support Services Group Ltd: EAT 13 Aug 2015

EAT Practice and Procedure : Appellate Jurisdiction/Reasons/Burns-Barke Costs The Employment Judge did not give Meek-compliant Reasons in respect of her decision not to uplift any part of her award under section 207A of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The Employment Judge omitted to decide an application for costs made by the … Continue reading Duhoe v Support Services Group Ltd: EAT 13 Aug 2015

Carroll v The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime: EAT 9 Feb 2015

EAT Practice and Procedure : Transfer/Hearing Together – Time for appealing Appeal from Registrar: the time limited by rule 3(3) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 (‘the EAT Rules’) for serving the documents necessary for the proper institution of an appeal, as provided for by rule 3(3)(1)(a)-(c) of the EAT Rules, started to run … Continue reading Carroll v The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime: EAT 9 Feb 2015

Drysdale v The Department of Transport (The Maritime and Coastguard Agency): CA 31 Jul 2014

The claimant had been represented at his claim before the employment tribunal by his wife, acting as a lay representative. She asked to be allowed to withdraw the complaint. Without asking her, the complaint was dismissed, and costs awarded against the claimant. He now appealed saying that the tribunal, knowing he was not represented by … Continue reading Drysdale v The Department of Transport (The Maritime and Coastguard Agency): CA 31 Jul 2014

Lodwick v London Borough of Southwark: CA 18 Mar 2004

The claimant alleged bias on the part of the employment appeal tribunal chairman hearing his appeal. The chairman refused to stand down, saying that he was only one of three tribunal members with an equal vote. The chairman had four year’s previously made adverse comments about the applicant in a case in which he had … Continue reading Lodwick v London Borough of Southwark: CA 18 Mar 2004

Serco Ltd v Lawson; Botham v Ministry of Defence; Crofts and others v Veta Limited: HL 26 Jan 2006

Mr Lawson was employed by Serco as a security supervisor at the British RAF base on Ascension Island, which is a dependency of the British Overseas Territory of St Helena. Mr Botham was employed as a youth worker at various Ministry of Defence establishments in Germany; under the NATO Status of Forces Agreement of 1951 … Continue reading Serco Ltd v Lawson; Botham v Ministry of Defence; Crofts and others v Veta Limited: HL 26 Jan 2006

Gwara v Mid Essex Primary Care Trust: EAT 17 Jul 2013

EAT Practice and Procedure : Bias, Misconduct and Procedural Irregularity – Costs – The Employment Tribunal did not comply with rule 38(9) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure (Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004) in that it did not afford the Claimant an opportunity – which means … Continue reading Gwara v Mid Essex Primary Care Trust: EAT 17 Jul 2013

Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James: CA 25 May 2006

The defendant company appealed against an order re-instating the claimants’ claims for damages for race discrimination and victimisation after they had been struck out for wilful disobedience of the tribunal’s orders. Held: When making a strike-out order, there were two cardinal conditions at least one of which must be met. Either the unreasonable conduct has … Continue reading Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James: CA 25 May 2006

Moroak T/A Blake Envelopes v Cromie: EAT 19 Apr 2005

moroak_cromieEAT2005 EAT Response lodged at the Employment Tribunal 44 minutes late and the Employment Tribunal ordered that the Respondent could take no part in the proceedings and refused to review that order on the basis it had no jurisdiction to do so. The Employment Tribunal has no power under Rule 4 to entertain an application … Continue reading Moroak T/A Blake Envelopes v Cromie: EAT 19 Apr 2005

St Albans Girls School and Another v Neary: CA 12 Nov 2009

The claimant’s case had been struck out after non-compliance with an order to file further particulars. His appeal was allowed by the EAT, and the School now itself appealed, saying that the employment judge had wrongly had felt obliged to have regard to the Civil Procedure Rules on striking cases out. Held: The school’s appeal … Continue reading St Albans Girls School and Another v Neary: CA 12 Nov 2009

X v Y Ltd (Practice and Procedure – Disclosure): EAT 9 Aug 2018

Iniquity surpasses legal advice privilege PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disclosure PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal An Employment Judge struck out paragraphs of the Claimant’s claim as they depended on an email in respect of which legal advice privilege was claimed. In considering whether privilege could not be claimed as the advice in the email was … Continue reading X v Y Ltd (Practice and Procedure – Disclosure): EAT 9 Aug 2018

Casqueiro (In A Matter of Wasted Costs) v Barclays Bank Plc: EAT 14 Jun 2012

casqueiroEAT2012 EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – CostsUnlike for ‘ordinary costs’ under Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 rule 41(1)(c), there is no power to refer wasted costs ordered under rule 48 to be assessed in the County Court. Further, the Employment Judge failed to consider, applying Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] Ch 205, … Continue reading Casqueiro (In A Matter of Wasted Costs) v Barclays Bank Plc: EAT 14 Jun 2012

Tayside Public Transportcompany Ltd (T/A Travel Dundee) v Reilly: SCS 30 May 2012

The respondent bus driver had claimed unfair dismissal following an accident. The Employment Tribunal struck out his case as having no reasonable prospect of success, but the case had been re-instated by the EAT. Held: the power given in the rules to strike out a case was draconian and to be used in exceptional cases … Continue reading Tayside Public Transportcompany Ltd (T/A Travel Dundee) v Reilly: SCS 30 May 2012

Amwell View School v Dogherty: EAT 15 Sep 2006

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

Clyde and Co Llp and Another v Winkelhof: QBD 22 Mar 2011

The claimant firm of solicitors sought an order requiring the defendant to amend her employment tribunal claim so as to accord with the partnership agreement to which she was party, and to submit to arbitration. The defendant said that statutory provisions said that her freedom to go to court could not be ousted, and that … Continue reading Clyde and Co Llp and Another v Winkelhof: QBD 22 Mar 2011

E and O Laboratories v Miller (Right of A Witness To Be Present): EAT 21 Aug 2019

Presence of witness at hearing – Scots practice The Employment Appeal Tribunal considered an appeal where a claim had been struck out because the Appellants’ witnesses had sat in during the evidence. The EAT concluded that notwithstanding Scottish practice, the terms of Rule 43 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 … Continue reading E and O Laboratories v Miller (Right of A Witness To Be Present): EAT 21 Aug 2019

Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd: CA 26 Jan 1994

Guidance for Wasted Costs Orders Guidance was given on the circumstances required for the making of wasted costs orders against legal advisers. A judge invited to make an order arising out of an advocate’s conduct of court proceedings must make full allowance for the fact that an advocate has to make decisions quickly and under … Continue reading Ridehalgh v Horsefield; Allen v Unigate Dairies Ltd: CA 26 Jan 1994

Abegaze v Shrewsbury College of Arts and Technology: CA 20 Feb 2009

In 2000 the claimant succeeded in his claim for discrimination, but had not pursued his remedy. He now appealed against a refusal to allow him to take it further. He had initially failed to pursue the matter for ill health. He later refused to submit to an examination by the defendant’s medical experts. Held: Whilst … Continue reading Abegaze v Shrewsbury College of Arts and Technology: CA 20 Feb 2009

Outasight VB Ltd v Brown: EAT 21 Nov 2014

outasightEAT201411 EAT Practice and Procedure: Review – Reconsideration – Rule 70 Schedule 1 Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 – fresh evidence – interests of justice Having lost his claim for wrongful dismissal/breach of contract before the Employment Tribunal, the Claimant applied for a reconsideration of that Judgment on the basis that … Continue reading Outasight VB Ltd v Brown: EAT 21 Nov 2014

Balamoody v United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting: CA 6 Dec 2001

The claimant had been struck from the register of nurses after convictions arising from failures of his staff at his nursing home with regard to drug management. He had then brought claims of unlawful race discrimination against the health authority and against the respondent. Those claims had been dismissed as frivolous, no valid comparator having … Continue reading Balamoody v United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting: CA 6 Dec 2001

William Jones’s Schools Foundation v Parry: EAT 2 Aug 2016

EAT jurisdiction EAT Practice and Procedure : Application/Claim – The Appellant appealed against the Decision of the Employment Tribunal (‘the ET’) not to reject the Claimant’s claim form under Rule 12(1)(b) of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 (‘the Rules’) and against a later Decision of the ET … Continue reading William Jones’s Schools Foundation v Parry: EAT 2 Aug 2016

Aikman v Stubbs: EAT 3 Sep 2001

The claimant made a claim against his former company and its chairman. The company was dissolved before the proceedings commenced. The chairman did not appear, and a finding of unfair dismissal was made against him. The tribunal made no proper . .

Acts

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

Storer v British Gas plc: CA 25 Feb 2000

An industrial tribunal hearing conducted behind the locked doors of the chairman’s office was not held in public, even if, in fact, no member of the public was prevented from attending. The obligation to sit in public was fundamental, and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to conduct itself in this way. The industrial tribunal system … Continue reading Storer v British Gas plc: CA 25 Feb 2000

Onwuka v Spherion Technology UK Ltd and others: EAT 26 Nov 2004

EAT The two appeals raised questions as to (i) whether the Chairman of an employment tribunal had misdirected herself in relation to an application to amend an originating application, and (ii) as to the jurisdiction of an employment tribunal under The Employment Tribunals (Constitutions and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 to review its own previous … Continue reading Onwuka v Spherion Technology UK Ltd and others: EAT 26 Nov 2004

Ghosh v London Borough of Tower Hamlets: EAT 2 Jul 1999

Preliminary appeal against order for payment by claimant of respondent’s costs of the hearing before the Emloyment Tribunal. Held: The appeal could go ahead. Judges: Charles J Citations: [1999] UKEAT 220 – 99 – 0207 Links: Bailii Statutes: Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: See Also … Continue reading Ghosh v London Borough of Tower Hamlets: EAT 2 Jul 1999

Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd: EAT 15 Feb 1999

The appellant wished to pursue an appeal against the striking out of his claim, and objected that contrary to the Rules, a member of the board who had heard the pre-hearing review had also sat on the full hearing. Held: The appeal should be allowed to go ahead. Judges: Charles J Citations: [1999] UKEAT 1170 … Continue reading Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd: EAT 15 Feb 1999

Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd: EAT 6 Oct 1999

The applicant objected that one of the lay members of the Appeal Tribunal had, on other occasions, sat with a recorder who, as counsel, was appearing for a party in that appeal. Held: There was no real possibility of bias from this scenario. The tribunal had to be independent and impartial, but mere generalised allegations … Continue reading Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd: EAT 6 Oct 1999

Dr I Kovacs v Queen Mary and Westfield College and Another: CA 22 Mar 2002

The claimant had had mixed success in claims for race discrimination, but appealed orders to pay to the costs of the respondents. She claimed to be impecunious and that that should have been taken into account before deciding whether a costs order should be made against her. Should a costs sanction be available to restrain … Continue reading Dr I Kovacs v Queen Mary and Westfield College and Another: CA 22 Mar 2002

Regina v London (North) Industrial Tribunal Ex Parte Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 13 May 1998

A tribunal had erred in ordering that names of both complainant and respondent and of witnesses should be protected in a sexual harassment case. The power only exists in respect of the complainant and a ‘person affected’. This group should not be extended. The imposition of general reporting restrictions on a sex discrimination case went … Continue reading Regina v London (North) Industrial Tribunal Ex Parte Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 13 May 1998

Divine-Bortey v London Borough of Brent: CA 14 May 1998

The claimant had brought and lost an action relating to his dismissal by the defendant, who now appealed against an order that he was not estopped from bring a second claim on a different basis namely race discrimination, disapplying the rule in Henderson. Held: The Council’s appeal succeeded. The rule in Henderson should have been … Continue reading Divine-Bortey v London Borough of Brent: CA 14 May 1998

Uche v Oxfordshire County Council (Unfair Dismissal): EAT 23 May 2013

EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL The Claimant’s appeal against the finding that she had not been unfairly constructively dismissed was refused on the basis of the facts found by the Employment Tribunal. The Employment Tribunal was entitled to conclude that she had not been dismissed at all, nor had she been the subject of sex or race … Continue reading Uche v Oxfordshire County Council (Unfair Dismissal): EAT 23 May 2013

Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore: EAT 2 May 1996

The claimant had been summarily dismissed. His application at first made no mention of a complaint that it had related to his trades union activities. He wrote to the secretary seeking amendment of his claim to include a claim that his dismissal was automatically unfair by reason of those activities. By this time the three … Continue reading Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore: EAT 2 May 1996