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 . .

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

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