W Balcerzak v George Birchall Service Limited & Anor
The appeal is allowed because there was no discrepancy between the respondent's name on the EC certificate and the Claim Form; the Tribunal made an error in rejecting the claim on this basis.
- Parties
- Claimant: Mr W Balcerzak; Respondent: George Birchall Service Limited; Respondent: Secretary of State for Business and Energy & Industrial Strategy
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 02 November 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Protective Award, Redundancy, Early Conciliation, Procedural Error
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mr W Balcerzak
Claimant
George Birchall Service Limited
Respondent
Secretary of State for Business and Energy & Industrial Strategy
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in rejecting the claim due to an alleged discrepancy between the respondent's name on the Early Conciliation Certificate and the Claim Form
- 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to exercise discretion under Rule 12 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal is allowed because there was no discrepancy between the respondent's name on the EC certificate and the Claim Form; the Tribunal made an error in rejecting the claim on this basis.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Appeal allowed; Tribunal's rejection of the claim set aside.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment