practice and procedure
-
Arrowsmith v Nottingham Trent University UKEATPA/1708/09/CEA
Appeal against the outcome of the review of an ET's judgment refusing to vary its decision upholding an order for costs made against the claimant. The claimant, who was claiming sex discrimination as a result of not getting a job because, as she claimed, she was pregnant, alleged that the review judgment was legally perverse. Appeal dismissed and an application to appeal to the Court of Appeal refused.
- cases
05/11/2010 15:34
-
Community Integrated Care v Peacock UKEATS/0015/10/BI
Appeal against decision by the ET that, even though the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was presented out of time, they could still hear her case as it was not reasonably practicable for her to have presented her claim in time due to her suffering from depression. The EAT found that the claimant's solicitor had failed to tell her about the 3 month limit. However, they ruled that this was not a case where the claimant’s health was so bad as to lead to the conclusion that even if she had been told about the time limit by her legal advisor she could not reasonably have been expected to be able to instruct the presentation of a claim. The factual findings all pointed to her having been in a position to do so if she had been told about it. Appeal succeeded and claim dismissed.
- cases
26/10/2010 14:13
-
Faleye & Anor v UK Mission Enterprise Ltd & Ors UKEAT/0359/10/LA
Appeal against decision that 4 cases which were linked should be heard together at one Tribunal. The EAT decided that the Employment Judge was perfectly entitled to proceed on the straightforward basis that all four cases needed to be case-managed together; that the only question was whether that should be in London South or London Central; that there was no particular presumption in favour of one or the other, given that no prejudice arose to the parties; and that thus the single factor clearly favouring London Central, namely its expertise in state immunity matters, should prevail. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
26/10/2010 11:35
-
Riniker v City & Islington College Corporation UKEATPA/0541/10/CEA; UKEATPA/0542/10/CEA
Rule 3(10) application appealing against: 1) the refusal by the Employment Judge to make changes, under the slip rule, to the title and substance of a review judgment; 2) the allegedly inconsistent, anomalous and unlawful situation that there were two judgments on the record in this case; and 3) the refusal to order the production of the Employment Judge's notes. 'Pre-hearing review' substituted with 'hearing' in ground 1. Other applications refused.
- cases
20/10/2010 15:11
-
Wilkinson v University of Lincoln [2010] EWCA Civ 1075
Renewed application for permission to appeal decision by the EAT which dismissed an appeal against the ET judgment relating to the applicant’s claim of unfair dismissal and discrimination. Application adjourned.
- cases
12/10/2010 15:37
-
Hunt v Tesco Stores Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 1069
Application to appeal, out of time, against a refusal of the EAT to review its decision, dismissing the applicant’s claim of unfair dismissal. Application refused.
- cases
12/10/2010 15:36
-
Allma Construction Ltd v Bonner UKEATS/0060/09/BI
Appeal against decision of an Employment Judge who held that no binding settlement had been reached after an offer to settle had been made and accepted, partly because ACAS did not believe that was the case. Appeal upheld and claim dismissed.
- cases
08/10/2010 10:09
-
East Dunbartonshire Council v Trade Union Backed Claimants & Ors UKEATS/0005/10/BI
Appeal against decision of the ET to allow amendment of an equal pay claim (adding new comparators) which, if it had been a fresh claim instead, would have been time barred. The respondent also objected to the fact they had had no opportunity to resolve the claims involving the new comparators at the grievance stage, and the Tribunal erred by saying that any prejudice suffered could be met by reducing the compensatory award. Appeal allowed; the EAT agreed that the amended claim did not meet the statutory criteria for a reduction in compensation, they allowed the claimants to amend their claims and remit these claims to the same Employment Judge to consider the applications to amend.
- cases
05/10/2010 16:15
-
Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited v Keeping UKEATS/0051/09/BI
Appeal by respondents against decision by Employment Judge to amend a claim to introduce a fresh equal pay claim in circumstances where there was no explanation for lateness but the judge had concluded that the time-bar was not in issue. The appeal was allowed partly because the judge had considered the wrong date. If she had considered the correct date she would have found that a time-bar arose and it would not have been open to her allow the amendment.
- cases
05/10/2010 16:11
-
Royal Bank of Scotland v Chaer UKEAT/0429/09/DM
Appeal against ruling by the Tribunal that the claimant had been unfairly dismissed due to the respondent employer not carrying out a proper investigation. Appeal dismissed.
- cases
30/09/2010 15:03
