header-logo header-logo

Extending time: from misery to forgiveness?

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

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
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
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll