header-logo header-logo

05 July 2024 / Ffyon Reilly
Issue: 8078 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Employment , Tribunals
printer mail-detail

Extending time: from misery to forgiveness?

180619
Ffyon Reilly looks at recent case law on judicial discretion as to minor errors
  • Discusses the judicial discretion offered by r 37(5) as to ‘minor error’, referring to Melki v Bouygues E and S Contracting UK and Jasim v LHR Airports.
  • Changes to r 37 apply to pending as well as future proceedings.
  • Addresses question of when two employment tribunal claims are consolidated and when they are tried together.

‘The denizens of the Employment Appeal Tribunal seem to me to be a hard-hearted lot… and mercy flows thinly in the lifeblood of the rules,’ remarked the Court of Appeal in Woods v Suffolk Mental Health NHS Trust [2007] EWCA Civ 1180. This observation refers to r 37, which requires an appeal to the EAT to be instituted within 42 days of the sending out of the tribunal’s reasons. United Arab Emirates v Abdelghafar & Anor [1995] IRLR 243, [1995] ICR 65 confirmed this rule, laying out the test for granting an extension:

a. What is the explanation

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll