Burmis v Governing Body of Aylesford School [2008] All ER (D) 28 (Oct)
(i) Rule 30(6) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1861) requires a tribunal, having identified the issues in the case, to provide a succinct chronological statement of the facts found, explaining where necessary why factual conflicts in evidence have been resolved by the tribunal in the way that they have. There must be a concise statement of the law. Finally, the tribunal has to demonstrate its reasoning, applying the law to the facts as found, and explaining its conclusions on the issues raised.
(ii) While a delay of a year in promulgating an employment tribunal judgment ought never to happen (the maximum stipulated by the president of the employment tribunals is threeand- a-half months), the unusual feature of the instant case was the number of days the tribunal spent considering the matter. It was not a case where there had been a large gap in time between the tribunal’s deliberations and production of the judgment and reasons. In those circumstances, the mere fact of delay was not, of itself, a free-standing ground of appeal.
