header-logo header-logo

Employment

11 March 2010
Issue: 7408 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Radakovits v Abbey National Plc [2009] EWCA Civ 1346, 010] All ER (D) 16 (Mar)

Authority established that time limits in the context of unfair dismissal claims went to jurisdiction, and that jurisdiction could not be conferred on a tribunal by agreement or waiver. The question of jurisdiction had to be taken by a tribunal if it considered that the issue was a properly live one. It was true that a tribunal could not exercise jurisdiction by concession and equally, in an appropriate case, the tribunal would be obliged to raise the issue of jurisdiction even though it had not been identified by the employers.

Tribunals properly had to guard against exercising a jurisdiction when the statutory conditions were not met. But they were not bloodhounds who had to sniff out potential grounds on which jurisdiction could be refused. If the parties agreed that a particular claimant was an employee, for example, then there would have to be good reason for the tribunal to doubt that that was the case and to require a preliminary hearing to investigate

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

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Hill Dickinson—Paul Matthews, Liz Graham & Sarah Pace

Leeds office strengthened with triple partner hire

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Clarke Willmott—Oksana Howard

Corporate lawyer joins as partner in London office

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll