Gentle & Ors v. Perkins Group Ltd [2000] UKEAT 670_99_1412 (14 December 2000)
There were no grounds under Rule 33 for reviewing the order of 17th May 2000, as there was no error, lack of notice, or interests of justice requiring review. The only matters properly before the EAT were those set out in the Hillier Form, and no further issues remained for appeal.
- Citation
- [2000] UKEAT 670_99_1412
- Parties
- Appellants: Gentle, Rackstraw and Robinson; Respondent: Perkins Group Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 14 December 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal Tribunal / Application for Review of Procedural Order Limiting Grounds of Appeal
- Outcome
- Application for review refused
- Legal Topics
- Re Engagement, Reinstatement, Amendment of Notice of Appeal, Costs, Compensation, Procedural Review
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gentle, Rackstraw and Robinson
Appellants
Perkins Group Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Application for Review of Procedural Order Limiting Grounds of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appellants should be granted leave to amend the Notice of Appeal beyond the previously authorised grounds (the 'Hillier Form')
- 2 Whether the interests of justice require a review of the order of 17th May 2000 limiting the grounds of appeal
Ratio Decidendi
There were no grounds under Rule 33 for reviewing the order of 17th May 2000, as there was no error, lack of notice, or interests of justice requiring review. The only matters properly before the EAT were those set out in the Hillier Form, and no further issues remained for appeal.
Court Disposition
Application for review refused
Orders
- No review of the order of 17th May 2000 is granted.
- No further issues remain for appeal before the EAT beyond those already determined.
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