J v K and Another (Practice and Procedure: Time for Appealing): EAT 10 May 2017

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Time for appealing
Rule 39(1) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 (‘the Rules’) is not relevant to the process of deciding whether an appeal has been lodged in time pursuant to Rule 37(1) of the Rules because the appeal process does not start until an appeal is properly instituted and Rule 39 only applies to a properly instituted appeal. Alternatively, where an appeal has been lodged out of time and the Registrar refuses to extend time that refusal will also operate automatically as a direction, pursuant to Rule 39, that Rule 39 does not validate the appeal.
Where it is alleged that a disability has prevented a proposed Appellant from complying with the time limit for the lodging of a properly instituted appeal at this Tribunal then specific medical evidence relevant to the proposed Appellant’s condition explaining how the disability has prevented compliance with the Rule must be presented. Quotations from publications on the Internet about conditions generally, whilst of some assistance, will not be sufficient without additional specific medical evidence.
The proposed Appellant had failed by an hour to submit his proposed appeal in time and had fallen into the trap of attempting to submit too much material attached to one email. This difficulty is clearly referred to in simple terms in guidance material easily accessible and the fact that the proposed Appellant had failed to allow himself sufficient time to submit the material in the series of emails was not a basis for the exercise of discretion in his favour.

Judges:

Hand QC HHJ

Citations:

[2017] UKEAT 0661 – 16 – 1005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 3991)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.590420