The Claimant won her claim for unfair dismissal in 2014 but the EJ found that she had been guilty of serious financial impropriety by carrying out four categories of unauthorized transaction for her own benefit. The Respondent publicised the judgment which resulted in the SRA imposing disciplinary sanctions by rebuking her and making a “section 43 order” which had the effect of preventing her working for any solicitors. The Respondent brought a claim against the Claimant in the High Court which was struck out, but which had brought about the disclosure of documents which the Claimant said should have been available at the ET hearing. She applied for a reconsideration of the ET judgment which by then was 6 years out of time. The EJ refused to extend time and the Claimant appealed.

The EAT allowed the appeal. The EAT decided that in considering whether to extend time the EJ had made an error of law in assessing the prejudice to the applicant of not extending time because she had failed to take account of and/or misapprehended facts relevant to that assessment. In the unusual circumstances of the case the matter was remitted to the EJ to consider extending time again in the light of all relevant circumstances now applying and, if she decided to extend time, to consider the application and whether to revoke the judgment.