The employers had sought to appeal from a decision of the employment tribunal. The EAT had refused it as out of time.
Held: The rules required the appellant to file within 42 days of receiving the decision, the notice of appeal together with a copy of the tribunal’s written reasons. ‘Sent’ meant the date on which the order is posted by the Employment Tribunal; the date on the document when the order was sent to the parties. The appellants had failed to include the decision. Other rules as to deemed time of delivery were inapplicable when the issue was the absence of a necessary document. The appeal was out of time.
Judges:
Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Longmore Lord Justice Scott Baker
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Civ 871, Times 21-Jul-2004, [2004] IRLR 725, [2004] ICR 1523, [2004] 3 All ER 666
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Wrongly decided – Immigration Advisory Services v Oommen EAT 19-Mar-1997
The claimant had been ordered to pay a deposit as a condition of being allowed to proceed with the claim which the tribunal had judged to have no reasonable prospect of success. The claim was struck out after the tribunal had been wrongly told that . .
Applied – Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council v Ladejobi EAT 2-Sep-1999
The time limits for lodging appeals against Employment tribunal rulings are strict. The date of promulgation is the operative date from which the date sent is to be calculated. The rules set aside the normal rules on interpretation as to when a . .
Applied – Sian v Abbey National Plc EAT 25-Jun-2003
EAT Practice and Procedure – Time for appealing . .
Cited by:
Cited – Sodexho Ltd v Gibbons EAT 14-Jul-2005
EAT Deposit ordered. Order lost in post due to the Claimant putting wrong post-code on ET1. Review. Distinguishing Judgments from Orders. Strike-out. Extending time. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.198602