William Jones’s Schools Foundation v Parry: EAT 2 Aug 2016

EAT jurisdiction

EAT Practice and Procedure : Application/Claim – The Appellant appealed against the Decision of the Employment Tribunal (‘the ET’) not to reject the Claimant’s claim form under Rule 12(1)(b) of Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 (‘the Rules’) and against a later Decision of the ET to refuse to reconsider the first Decision.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that it had jurisdiction to hear both appeals. It held that the primary legislation (the Employment Tribunals Act 1996) authorised the requirement contained in Rule 12(1)(b), but does not authorise it to be applied in the course of the procedure provided for by Rule 12. A different test is authorised to be applied in that procedure. Accordingly, although the ET’s decision not to reject the ET1 would have been perverse, if the Rule 12(1)(b) test was the correct test, it was a decision the ET was entitled to make, applying the test authorised by statute.
Since the first Decision was correct, the appeal against the refusal to reconsider was academic, and was dismissed. The EAT said that, had the second appeal not been academic, it would have been allowed, as the ET had erred in deciding that the first Decision was not a ‘Judgment’ for the purposes of the Rules.

Laing DBE J
[2016] UKEAT 0088 – 16 – 0208, [2016] ICR 1140
Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013, Employment Tribunals Act 1996, Employment Rights Act 1996
England and Wales


Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.567895