Koyama v Lindley & Anor

Koyama v Lindley & Anor

The application was dismissed because the named respondents were not the applicant's employer, the applicant objected to substituting the correct corporate respondents, and there was no error of law by the EAT or the employment tribunal.

Parties
Appellant: Koyama; Respondent: Lindley; Respondent: McCourt
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Employment Discrimination, Age Discrimination, Unauthorised Wage Deductions, Proper Parties to Employment Claims, Procedural Rules for Employment Tribunals
Employment Law Employment Discrimination Age Discrimination Unauthorised Wage Deductions Proper Parties to Employment Claims Procedural Rules for Employment Tribunals

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Koyama

Appellant

Lindley

Respondent

McCourt

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employment tribunal erred in dismissing the claim against the named respondents as improper parties
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's objection to substituting the correct corporate respondents was fatal to his claim
  3. 3 Whether the claim had any reasonable prospect of success even if brought against the correct parties

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the named respondents were not the applicant's employer, the applicant objected to substituting the correct corporate respondents, and there was no error of law by the EAT or the employment tribunal.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • renewed application for permission to appeal dismissed