Practice and Procedure — Application/Claim
The Employment Tribunal (‘the ET’) rejected the Appellant’s ET1 under rule 10(1)(c) of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure. The brief reasons for the decision were not consistent with a rejection under rule 10(1)(c). In response to written questions from the Employment Appeal Tribunal (‘the EAT’) the Employment Judge (‘the EJ’) said she had applied rule 12(1)(f) when rejecting the claim. The Appellant applied for reconsideration of the rejection. The EJ did not uphold the rejection under rule 10(1)(c), or under rule 12(1)(f), but rejected the claim for abuse of process (rule 12(1)(b)). The Appellant did not appeal against that decision, or apply for it be reconsidered.
The EAT held that the rejection under rule 10(1)(c) was unlawful, as rule 10(1)(c) did not apply, and that the decision could not be interpreted as a rejection under rule 12(1)(f), as that rule was not referred to and there was no evidence that the EJ had made the judicial assessments required by rule 12(2A).
Citations:
[2019] UKEAT 0217 – 18 – 0706
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.643077