header-logo header-logo

Strike force (3)

17 May 2013 / Mark Whitcombe
Issue: 7560 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Mark Whitcombe concludes his examination of the employment tribunal’s approach to striking out

The express power to issue an unless order was first introduced in the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2004. In several cases including Scottish Ambulance Service v Laing [2012] UKEAT 0038/12/1710 and and Richards v Manpower Services Ltd [2013] UKEAT 0014/13 the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has explained that unless orders are conditional judgments. They should not be confused with the various powers to strike out under r 18(7), and very different considerations arise.

A failure to comply with an unless order will lead to an automatic strike out under r 13(2). In the event of non-compliance, tribunals do not have discretion to do anything other than confirm dismissal of the claim. Partial compliance will not suffice to avoid the consequences of the unless order (Royal Bank of Scotland v Abraham [2009] UKEAT 0305/09/2608).

Since an unless order is a conditional judgment it is both susceptible to review under r 34 and also appealable to the EAT. Findings of fact

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