Africa Advocacy Foundation v. Kiwanuka [2001] UKEAT 0164_01_2405 (24 May 2001)

Africa Advocacy Foundation v. Kiwanuka [2001] UKEAT 0164_01_2405 (24 May 2001)

There was no error of law in the refusal to review the original decision; the application for review was out of time, the grounds advanced did not justify an extension, and the Foundation's ignorance of its legal status did not warrant reopening the case. No arguable error of law was found in the Chairman's decision.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 0164_01_2405
Parties
Applicant: Mr K Kiwanuka; Respondent/appellant: Africa Advocacy Foundation
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
24 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing Ex Parte
Outcome
Appeal dismissed at preliminary stage; leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Unlawful Wage Deductions, Review of Tribunal Decisions, Extension of Time, Proper Party to Proceedings, Natural Justice, Human Rights Act
Employment Law Charity Law Unlawful Wage Deductions Review of Tribunal Decisions Extension of Time Proper Party to Proceedings Natural Justice Human Rights Act

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Mr K Kiwanuka

Applicant

Africa Advocacy Foundation

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing Ex Parte

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in making an order against the Foundation rather than its trustees
  2. 2 Whether the application for review was properly refused as out of time
  3. 3 Whether there was judicial bias or breach of natural justice

Ratio Decidendi

There was no error of law in the refusal to review the original decision; the application for review was out of time, the grounds advanced did not justify an extension, and the Foundation's ignorance of its legal status did not warrant reopening the case. No arguable error of law was found in the Chairman's decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed at preliminary stage; leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Application for review refused.
  • Appeal dismissed.