Arkell & Anor v. Tibbetts [2000] EAT 461_99_0702 (7 February 2000)
The appeal for extension of time cannot be allowed because the underlying proceedings were stayed following a compromise, and there has been no appeal against the stay. Even if time for appeal had not started due to lack of reasons, the stay prevents the appeal from proceeding.
- Citation
- [2000] EAT 461_99_0702
- Parties
- Appellant: Mr N D Arkell; Appellant: PSU Designs Ltd; Respondent: Mrs S Tibbetts
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 07 February 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal From Registrar's Order (employment Appeal Tribunal) / Appeal Against Refusal to Extend Time for Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Extension of Time, Appeal Procedure, Compromise and Stay of Proceedings, Duress
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mr N D Arkell
Appellant
PSU Designs Ltd
Appellant
Mrs S Tibbetts
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Registrar's Order (employment Appeal Tribunal) / Appeal Against Refusal to Extend Time for Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether extension of time for appeal should be granted where no reasons were given for the original order
- 2 Whether the compromise was entered into under duress
- 3 Whether appeal can proceed where proceedings have been stayed
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal for extension of time cannot be allowed because the underlying proceedings were stayed following a compromise, and there has been no appeal against the stay. Even if time for appeal had not started due to lack of reasons, the stay prevents the appeal from proceeding.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal against Registrar's refusal to extend time is dismissed.
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