The Appellant had had his claims for unfair dismissal, race discrimination and disability discrimination rejected by the ET. He lodged an application for reconsideration of that decision, which the ET refused on the grounds that the application was made out of time and it had no reasonable prospects of success. The Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal against the ET's refusal, and the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal to the EAT on the basis that the Appellant had made two arguable points: (1) the ET had overlooked his application for an extension of time; and (2) the ET had not met its duty to give reasons for its decision when it dismissed the application in one line.

The EAT held that the ET had erred in law (1) in not considering the Appellant's application for an extension of time, and (2) in addressing its duty to give reasons in the way that it did; however, the EAT considered that neither error of law was material, because the application for reconsideration did not in any way seek to contradict or undermine the inferences which the ET drew, or did not draw, from its factual conclusions. Accordingly, the only conclusion that the ET could have reached in relation to the application for reconsideration was that it did not satisfy the test for granting a reconsideration, and the matter would not be remitted to the ET.