R Peposhi v Go Crisis Limited & Anor

R Peposhi v Go Crisis Limited & Anor

The Judge erred by applying a qualitative assessment to the Claimant's compliance with the Unless Order, rather than determining objectively whether the requirements of the Order were met. The Claimant provided a written statement and relevant documents within the timeframe, and any ambiguity in the Order should have been resolved in his favour. The dismissal of the claim was therefore in error and the appeal is allowed.

Parties
Appellant: Mr R Peposhi; First Respondent: Go Crisis Limited; Second Respondent: Woven Solutions Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Unless Orders, Disability Discrimination, Case Management, Remote Hearings, Procedural Fairness
Employment Law Civil Procedure Unless Orders Disability Discrimination Case Management Remote Hearings Procedural Fairness

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

Parties

Mr R Peposhi

Appellant

Go Crisis Limited

First Respondent

Woven Solutions Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Judge erred in finding non-compliance with an Unless Order and dismissing the claim under Rule 38 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2013.
  2. 2 Whether ambiguity in the Unless Order should have been resolved in favour of the Claimant.

Ratio Decidendi

The Judge erred by applying a qualitative assessment to the Claimant's compliance with the Unless Order, rather than determining objectively whether the requirements of the Order were met. The Claimant provided a written statement and relevant documents within the timeframe, and any ambiguity in the Order should have been resolved in his favour. The dismissal of the claim was therefore in error and the appeal is allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The dismissal of the claim is set aside.