The Claimant's name was legally changed by deed poll after the EC certificate had been issued and therefore the name on the certificate was not the same as that on the ET1. The ET rejected the claim and the Claimant appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal. The ET erred in law by rejecting the claim without considering whether the Claimant had made an error “in relation to a name”. Further, the ET failed to consider whether Rule 6 entitled it to treat the requirement of Rule 12(1)(e) as satisfied. In this case the only conclusion open to the ET was that the claim fell to be accepted. A decision to accept the claim as at the date of presentation (9 July 2024) would be substituted.