Meyer v Department of Agriculture & Anor [2003] NIFET 181_97 (21 February 2003)

Meyer v Department of Agriculture & Anor [2003] NIFET 181_97 (21 February 2003)

The applicant's application for review was made over 11 months after the decision, concerning documents he had received at the hearing and objected to their admission. The tribunal found the applicant responsible for the delay, rejected his explanation regarding the documents, and concluded that the interests of justice did not require an extension of time. The applicant acted unreasonably in pursuing the application, justifying an order for costs against him.

Citation
[2003] NIFET 181_97
Parties
Applicant: James Meyer; First Respondent: Department of Agriculture; Second Respondent: Department of Finance and Personnel
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
21 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Application for Extension of Time to Review Tribunal Decision / Decision on Application for Extension of Time and Costs
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; costs awarded against applicant.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Review of Tribunal Decision, Costs, Fair Hearing, Procedural Fairness
Employment Law Administrative Law Extension of Time Review of Tribunal Decision Costs Fair Hearing 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Meyer

Applicant

Department of Agriculture

First Respondent

Department of Finance and Personnel

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Extension of Time to Review Tribunal Decision / Decision on Application for Extension of Time and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the time limit for applying for a review of the tribunal's decision should be extended
  2. 2 Whether the applicant acted unreasonably in bringing the application for review

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's application for review was made over 11 months after the decision, concerning documents he had received at the hearing and objected to their admission. The tribunal found the applicant responsible for the delay, rejected his explanation regarding the documents, and concluded that the interests of justice did not require an extension of time. The applicant acted unreasonably in pursuing the application, justifying an order for costs against him.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; costs awarded against applicant.

Orders

  • Refusal to extend the time limit for review application.
  • Applicant to pay respondents £1,495.00 in costs.