Langley-Di Guiseppe v. Yamaichi (Europe) International Ltd [2000] EAT 248_99_1812 (18 December 2000)

Langley-Di Guiseppe v. Yamaichi (Europe) International Ltd [2000] EAT 248_99_1812 (18 December 2000)

The Employment Tribunal erred by rigidly applying a 21-day cut-off and failing to consider the individual circumstances of the appellant, including her reliance on management assurances, maternity leave, illness, and late discovery of relevant facts. It was not reasonably practicable for her to present her claims...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2000] EAT 248_99_1812
Parties
Appellant: Mrs Langley-Di Giuseppe; Respondent: Respondent (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
18 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal's Decision on Jurisdiction (out of Time)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Unauthorised Deduction of Wages, Racial Discrimination, Redundancy Payment, Breach of Contract, Unfair Dismissal, Limitation Periods, Extension of Time
Employment Law Discrimination Law Unauthorised Deduction of Wages Racial Discrimination Redundancy Payment Breach of Contract Unfair Dismissal Limitation Periods +1 more

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Langley-Di Giuseppe

Appellant

Respondent (unnamed)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Employment Tribunal's Decision on Jurisdiction (out of Time)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in refusing to extend time for presentation of claims for unauthorised deduction of wages, breach of contract, unfair dismissal, and racial discrimination
  2. 2 Whether it was reasonably practicable for the appellant to present her claims within the statutory time limits
  3. 3 Whether it was just and equitable to extend time for the discrimination claims

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred by rigidly applying a 21-day cut-off and failing to consider the individual circumstances of the appellant, including her reliance on management assurances, maternity leave, illness, and late discovery of relevant facts. It was not reasonably practicable for her to present her claims within the primary limitation period, and it was just and equitable to extend time for her discrimination claims.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • All complaints remitted to the Employment Tribunal for hearing on the merits