Bowers & Anor v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Practice and Procedure) [2014] UKEAT 0173_14_2110 (21 October 2014)

Bowers & Anor v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Practice and Procedure) [2014] UKEAT 0173_14_2110 (21 October 2014)

The Employment Judge recognised and exercised the discretion to extend time for requesting written reasons, considered relevant factors including delay and absence of explanation, and was entitled to refuse the extension; there was no error of law or misdirection in the exercise of discretion.

Citation
[2014] UKEAT 0173_14_2110
Parties
First Appellant: Mr Bowers; Second Appellant: Mr Atherton; Respondent: Respondent (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
21 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision on Refusal to Extend Time for Written Reasons
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Written Reasons, Procedural Fairness, Discretion of Tribunal, Appeal Rights
Employment Law Civil Procedure Extension of Time Written Reasons Procedural Fairness Discretion of Tribunal Appeal Rights

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Bowers

First Appellant

Mr Atherton

Second Appellant

Respondent (unnamed)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Decision on Refusal to Extend Time for Written Reasons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Judge recognised and exercised discretion to extend time for requesting written reasons
  2. 2 Whether the exercise of discretion was legally flawed or Wednesbury unreasonable
  3. 3 Whether there was a procedural error in not providing written reasons as allegedly promised

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Judge recognised and exercised the discretion to extend time for requesting written reasons, considered relevant factors including delay and absence of explanation, and was entitled to refuse the extension; there was no error of law or misdirection in the exercise of discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for extension of time for written reasons refused
  • No further hearing on ground 1 permitted