Sometimes neither side is satisfied with the employment tribunal’s decision, and both sides want to appeal. A cross-appeal is basically just an appeal by whichever…
This is case about a notice to appeal that was rejected on the sift. The appellant then applied for an oral hearing, where the appeal was again rejected.
The facts and issues in this case are of limited general interest, but the judgment is significant because it sets out how the EAT Judges see the application to appeal process.
If both parties are going to give the tribunal a skeleton argument or written submissions, the usual thing is to exchange them simultaneously. The idea is that neither side gets to write their document having the unfair advantage of a preview of their opponent’s.
The EAT has produced a new practice direction. This replaces the previous (2004) practice direction from the 22nd May 2008. There is no radical change.…
Many appeal cases are not finally resolved by Employment Appeal Tribunal. So when running an appeal case, you need to consider the possibility of it returning to the tribunal. Lawyers often describe this as a case being remitted.
Mushett v London Borough of Hounslow gives valuable guidance on when the EAT will extend the deadline for lodging an appeal.
The EAT laid out a series of principles that it would apply. In summary these are:
In Secretary of State for Health & ors v Rance & ors [2007] IRLR 665, HHJ McMullen reviews the authorities on when the EAT will be prepared to entertain a new point of law or permit a concession to be withdrawn, and sets out at paragraph 50 of his judgment the principles that he draws from them, as well as finding 3 new relevant factors in Rance itself.