Where an Industrial Tribunal’s decision could not be reviewed because under the rules, the new evidence had been available, a review based on the new evidence should only be granted where there existed some mitigation causing the failure to bring the matter within the rules, rather than the nature of the dispute at large, making it such that the interests of justice required a review. ‘ . . in logic and in law this (that which is in the interests of justice) has to be geared to [the particular provisions at issue] and not to the nature of the dispute at large.’
Judges:
Bristow J
Citations:
[1985] 1 ICR 198
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Flint v Eastern Electricity Board EAT 1975
The employee had failed to mention at the hearing of his claim for a redundancy payment a fact which was arguably highly material to the issue of whether his refusal of alternative employment was reasonable; and his claim had been dismissed. He . .
Cited by:
Cited – Stanley Cole (Wainfleet) Ltd v Sheridan CA 25-Jul-2003
The employment tribunal, in delivering its judgment had cited a decision which was not among those referred to by the parties, but it did not give an opportunity to them to comment on it before delivering its decision.
Held: Such an ommission . .
Cited – Saggar v Ministry of Defence EAT 25-May-2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, . .
Appeal from – Deria v General Council of British Shipping 1986
The claimant alleged race discrimination by an employment agency against when he applied for work on a British registered ship, which was not an establishment in Great Britain at the relevant time. At the time of refusal it was not contemplated or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185967