E v X & Anor (JURIDICTIONAL : TIME POINTS & PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE) [2020] UKEAT 20_0079_20_1012 (10 December 2020)

E v X & Anor (JURIDICTIONAL : TIME POINTS & PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE) [2020] UKEAT 20_0079_20_1012 (10 December 2020)

Employment Judge Sherratt erred in law by refusing to conduct the preliminary hearing ordered by Employment Judge Ryan in the absence of a material change in circumstances or compelling justification. The original case management order should not have been revoked, as the claims against E and Z were out of time and no victimisation claim was pleaded against them. The appeals are allowed, the original orders restored, and the matter remitted for a preliminary hearing before a fresh tribunal.

Citation
[2020] UKEAT 20_0079_20_1012
Parties
Appellant: E; Appellant: L; Respondent: X; Respondent: Z
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
10 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Full Hearing
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Harassment, Victimisation, Jurisdiction, Time Limits, Continuing Act, Case Management, Strike Out
Employment Law Discrimination Harassment Victimisation Jurisdiction Time Limits Continuing Act Case Management +1 more

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

E

Appellant

L

Appellant

X

Respondent

Z

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Full Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Employment Judge Sherratt erred in refusing to conduct a preliminary hearing to determine jurisdictional/time issues regarding harassment and victimisation claims
  2. 2 Whether the claims against E and Z were out of time and should be struck out
  3. 3 Whether there was a material change in circumstances justifying revocation of an earlier case management order

Ratio Decidendi

Employment Judge Sherratt erred in law by refusing to conduct the preliminary hearing ordered by Employment Judge Ryan in the absence of a material change in circumstances or compelling justification. The original case management order should not have been revoked, as the claims against E and Z were out of time and no victimisation claim was pleaded against them. The appeals are allowed, the original orders restored, and the matter remitted for a preliminary hearing before a fresh tribunal.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Orders of the original employment tribunal restored
  • Matter remitted for preliminary hearing before a fresh employment tribunal