EAT Practice and Procedure : Postponement or Stay – The Appellant’s solicitors made an application for an adjournment of a hearing on the grounds that the Appellant’s managing director was unable to attend by reason of a business commitment: no details of the commitment were given. The day prior to the hearing an Employment Judge refused the application, expressly stating that the application could be renewed if appropriate at the hearing. The Appellant did not attend the hearing, which proceeded in the Appellant’s absence. It was argued that the Employment Judge erred in law in refusing the application and that the hearing ought in any event to have been adjourned.
Held: appeal dismissed. The Employment Judge when refusing the application for an adjournment applied the correct legal test; and there was no error in proceeding with the hearing the following day. Transport for London v O’Cathail [2013] ICR 614 applied.
David Richardson J
[2013] UKEAT 0098 – 13 – 1109
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 01 December 2021; Ref: scu.522338
