Anderson v Turning Point Eespro
The Tribunal acted appropriately by adjourning the hearing to facilitate representation for the Appellant and was not required to conduct a ground rules hearing or instruct its own expert. Once the Appellant was represented, her interests were adequately protected, and no unfairness occurred.
- Parties
- Appellant: Jade Anderson; Respondent: Turning Point Eespro; Intervener: Equality and Human Rights Commission; Intervener: Mind; Intervener: Lord Chancellor
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 15 May 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Reasonable Adjustments, Fair Hearing, Vulnerable Parties, Ground Rules Hearing, Expert Evidence, Representation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jade Anderson
Appellant
Turning Point Eespro
Respondent
Equality and Human Rights Commission
Intervener
Mind
Intervener
Lord Chancellor
Intervener
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal failed to make reasonable adjustments for a disabled party
- 2 Whether the Tribunal erred by not conducting a ground rules hearing
- 3 Whether the Tribunal should have instructed its own expert on reasonable adjustments
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal acted appropriately by adjourning the hearing to facilitate representation for the Appellant and was not required to conduct a ground rules hearing or instruct its own expert. Once the Appellant was represented, her interests were adequately protected, and no unfairness occurred.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
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