Lambert v Lowery & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 138 (2 February 2001)

Lambert v Lowery & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 138 (2 February 2001)

The Employment Tribunal exercised its discretion under rule 11 to grant a review after finding Mr Lambert had a genuine reason for his absence, and there was no error of law or perversity in that decision; thus, the application for permission to appeal was refused.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 138
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Allen J Lambert; Respondent/applicant: David Lowery; Respondent/applicant: Chelsea Village Management Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Breach of Contract, Racial Discrimination, Review of Tribunal Decisions, Absence of Party at Hearing, Exercise of Discretion
Employment Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Breach of Contract Racial Discrimination Review of Tribunal Decisions Absence of Party at Hearing Exercise of Discretion

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Allen J Lambert

Applicant/respondent

David Lowery

Respondent/applicant

Chelsea Village Management Limited

Respondent/applicant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in granting a review of its decision to dismiss Mr Lambert's claim in his absence
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Tribunal's exercise of discretion under rule 11 was flawed by error of law or principle

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal exercised its discretion under rule 11 to grant a review after finding Mr Lambert had a genuine reason for his absence, and there was no error of law or perversity in that decision; thus, the application for permission to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application refused