Ironopolis Film Co Ltd and Others v Fox: EAT 7 May 2009

EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Striking-out/dismissal
The Employment Judge through the Tribunal Office wrongly informed the second, third and fourth Respondents that they could not take any action in the proceedings other to seek a review. When striking out the responses under the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 Schedule I Rule 18(7) he erred in proceeding as if Rule 9 applied. Those Respondents were deprived of the opportunity of making representations at the hearing. Judgment on liability of the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents was set aside and the case against them remitted to a differently constituted Employment Tribunal. Judgment on liability of the First Respondent remains in place. The case against the First Respondent is remitted to a differently constituted Employment Tribunal to determine remedy.

Citations:

[2009] UKEAT 0314 – 08 – 0705

Links:

Bailii

Employment

Updated: 28 July 2022; Ref: scu.347321