header-logo header-logo

Employment law

12 June 2008
Issue: 7325 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Jurkowska v Hlmad Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 231, [2008] IRLR 430

The introduction into the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) rules of the “overriding objective... to deal with cases justly” does not mean that the EAT must adopt a more relaxed approach to the extension of the 42-day time limit for appealing than that set out by the EAT in United Arab Emirates v Abdelghafar [1995] ICR 65, [1995] IRLR 243.

It will only be in rare and exceptional cases that it will be appropriate to extend time. The principles identified in Abdelghafar remain good law, although they are guidelines and every case will turn on its facts. The decision whether to extend time is pre-eminently a discretionary one for the judge. In the ordinary run of cases, it will be necessary for a good excuse for the delay to be shown. However, even if the explanation does not amount to a good excuse, there may be exceptional circumstances which still justify an extension.

Issue: 7325 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Law students and graduates can now apply to qualify as solicitors and barristers with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
back-to-top-scroll