Samuel v Home Office & Anor [2002] EWCA Civ 1521 (21 October 2002)
There was no real prospect of success in the appeal as the repeated exercise of discretion by the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal was not flawed; the applicant's failure to attend was without satisfactory explanation and the dismissal was within the tribunal's discretion.
- Citation
- [2002] EWCA Civ 1521
- Parties
- Applicant: Samuel; Respondent: Home Office and Another
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 21 October 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Discrimination Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for permission to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Racial Discrimination, Dismissal for Non Attendance, Exercise of Tribunal Discretion, Review of Tribunal Decisions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Samuel
Applicant
Home Office and Another
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Discrimination Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in dismissing the applicant's claim for non-attendance
- 2 Whether the exercise of discretion by the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal was flawed
- 3 Whether an adjournment should have been granted instead of dismissal
Ratio Decidendi
There was no real prospect of success in the appeal as the repeated exercise of discretion by the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal was not flawed; the applicant's failure to attend was without satisfactory explanation and the dismissal was within the tribunal's discretion.
Court Disposition
Application for permission to appeal refused
Orders
- Permission to appeal refused
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