Koyunco v. Primmer & Ors [2008] UKEAT 0102_08_0107 (1 July 2008)

Koyunco v. Primmer & Ors [2008] UKEAT 0102_08_0107 (1 July 2008)

Neither Mr Koyunco nor Mr Aldogan provided a good excuse for failing to present a response (ET3) to the Employment Tribunal. Signing documents on behalf of the company binds the signatory to the proceedings. Reliance on accountants or lack of English proficiency does not constitute a valid excuse. Both appeals are dismissed.

Citation
[2008] UKEAT 0102_08_0107
Parties
Appellant/second Respondent: Mr Kemal Koyunco; Cross Appellant/third Respondent: Mr Malik Aldogan; First Respondent: Mayflower Kebabs Ltd; Fourth Respondent: Laxtone Ltd; Claimant: Ms Sarah Primmer
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
01 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal Against Employment Tribunal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Sex Discrimination, Sexual Harassment, Failure to Pay Wages, Holiday Pay, Breach of Contract, Practice and Procedure
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Sex Discrimination Sexual Harassment Failure to Pay Wages Holiday Pay Breach of Contract Practice and Procedure

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Kemal Koyunco

Appellant/second Respondent

Mr Malik Aldogan

Cross Appellant/third Respondent

Mayflower Kebabs Ltd

First Respondent

Laxtone Ltd

Fourth Respondent

Ms Sarah Primmer

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal Against Employment Tribunal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a good excuse for failing to present a response (ET3) to the Employment Tribunal
  2. 2 Whether the individual respondents had a reasonably arguable defence to the claims
  3. 3 Personal liability of company officers for employment claims

Ratio Decidendi

Neither Mr Koyunco nor Mr Aldogan provided a good excuse for failing to present a response (ET3) to the Employment Tribunal. Signing documents on behalf of the company binds the signatory to the proceedings. Reliance on accountants or lack of English proficiency does not constitute a valid excuse. Both appeals are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Both the appeal by Mr Koyunco and the cross-appeal by Mr Aldogan are dismissed.