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
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
