Outasight VB Ltd v Brown (Practice and Procedure: Review) [2014] UKEAT 0253_14_2111 (21 November 2014)

Outasight VB Ltd v Brown (Practice and Procedure: Review) [2014] UKEAT 0253_14_2111 (21 November 2014)

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by concluding that the 2013 Rules permitted a broader discretion to admit fresh evidence than under the previous rules and by failing to apply the principles in Ladd v Marshall. The Claimant could, with reasonable diligence, have obtained the evidence of Mr Whittaker’s conviction prior to the original hearing. There were no additional circumstances or mitigating factors justifying reconsideration in the interests of justice. The Tribunal’s decision to revoke the original judgment was therefore erroneous and perverse.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0253_14_2111
Parties
Claimant: Claimant (name not specified); Respondent: Respondent (name not specified)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
21 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal Appeal Against Reconsideration Judgment / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Reconsideration Judgment revoked. Liability Judgment reinstated.
Legal Topics
Reconsideration of Judgment, Admission of Fresh Evidence, Wrongful Dismissal, Breach of Contract, Interests of Justice, Finality in Litigation
Employment Law Civil Procedure Reconsideration of Judgment Admission of Fresh Evidence Wrongful Dismissal Breach of Contract Interests of Justice Finality in Litigation

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Claimant (name not specified)

Claimant

Respondent (name not specified)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal Appeal Against Reconsideration Judgment / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in admitting fresh evidence on reconsideration under the 2013 Rules
  2. 2 Whether the principles in Ladd v Marshall remain applicable under the 2013 Rules
  3. 3 Whether the interests of justice required reconsideration in this case

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by concluding that the 2013 Rules permitted a broader discretion to admit fresh evidence than under the previous rules and by failing to apply the principles in Ladd v Marshall. The Claimant could, with reasonable diligence, have obtained the evidence of Mr Whittaker’s conviction prior to the original hearing. There were no additional circumstances or mitigating factors justifying reconsideration in the interests of justice. The Tribunal’s decision to revoke the original judgment was therefore erroneous and perverse.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Reconsideration Judgment revoked. Liability Judgment reinstated.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The Reconsideration Judgment is revoked.