EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Review
JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Extension of time: reasonably practicable
The Claimant’s solicitor faxed an ET1 claiming unfair dismissal to the Tribunal more than 3 months after the effective date of termination. He said that he had sent an ET1 by post earlier, but the Tribunal had not received it. He did not attend a PHR convened for the purpose of determining whether the claim was out of time. The claim was held to be out of time. The Claimant’s solicitor applied for a review, saying that the notice of PHR was not on file.
Held: (1) The Employment Tribunal was entitled to refuse the review – reg 34(3)(b) and (c) and reg 61(2) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure considered.
(2) In any event the claim was out of time – if the Claimant’s solicitor wished, close to the 3 month deadline, to reply on post as opposed to fax or email, he should check whether the claim form has arrived by the deadline – Capital Foods Retail v Corrigan [1993] IRLR 430 applied.
Judges:
David Richardson J
Citations:
[2012] UKEAT 0149 – 12 – 2008
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463768