Harper & Anor v Hopkins

Harper & Anor v Hopkins

The applicants failed to provide a sufficient excuse for their late filing; their misunderstanding of the time limit and decision to delay were not justified. The Employment Appeal Tribunal correctly exercised its discretion in refusing an extension of time, and there was no misdirection or error in approach.

Parties
Applicant: John Harper; Applicant: Julie Watson; Respondent: George Edward Hopkins
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Appeal From the Employment Appeal Tribunal
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Unfair Dismissal, Default Judgment, Procedural Compliance

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Harper

Applicant

Julie Watson

Applicant

George Edward Hopkins

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Appeal From the Employment Appeal Tribunal

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Appeal Tribunal erred in refusing an extension of time for appealing against the refusal of a review of a default judgment
  2. 2 Whether the applicants provided a sufficient excuse for non-compliance with the 42-day appeal deadline

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to provide a sufficient excuse for their late filing; their misunderstanding of the time limit and decision to delay were not justified. The Employment Appeal Tribunal correctly exercised its discretion in refusing an extension of time, and there was no misdirection or error in approach.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • No extension of time granted