On day one of a ten-day hearing the ET refused an application made on behalf of the Claimant to postpone the hearing. The application was renewed on day two. It was refused on the basis that there had been no material change of circumstances since the previous day. The Claimant appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal. The ET erred because, in particular, (a) the application had been renewed in part on the basis of the Claimant’s representative’s deteriorating ill health. Although the ET had decided the previous day that the hearing would continue, with adjustments for the representative, the representative had confirmed that he would not be representing because of his ill health, and there was medical evidence to support that stance; (b) the ET had failed to consider the full potential implications for the Claimant, of the loss at this stage of her representative, in terms of her ability to represent herself, taking account of the evidence of her mental health disability. That went beyond the issue of whether she could give evidence without a witness statement, which had been the focus of consideration the previous day; and (c) the ET failed to consider the option of a short postponement to allow the Claimant to obtain further medical evidence about her own ability to represent herself. That would have been a viable option in this case in particular given the length of the listing.