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.
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
Legal Issues
- 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 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
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