Safeway Stores Ltd v. Royer [2005] UKEAT 0520_04_0303 (3 March 2005)

Safeway Stores Ltd v. Royer [2005] UKEAT 0520_04_0303 (3 March 2005)

The withdrawal of the Claimant's case in May 2003 by her solicitors was effective and binding, regardless of subsequent difficulties or administrative errors. The Claimant was unjustly debarred due to administrative errors, but this was corrected on review, and the substantive dismissal of the appeal was affirmed.

Citation
[2005] UKEAT 0520_04_0303
Parties
Claimant: Keisha Zoe Royer; Respondent: Safeway
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
03 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal Tribunal Review / Review of Debarment and Substantive Dismissal of Appeal
Outcome
Application for review allowed; original order dismissing the appeal affirmed.
Legal Topics
Review of Tribunal Decisions, Debarment, Withdrawal of Claim, Disability Discrimination, Reasonable Adjustments
Employment Law Administrative Law Review of Tribunal Decisions Debarment Withdrawal of Claim Disability Discrimination Reasonable Adjustments

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keisha Zoe Royer

Claimant

Safeway

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal Tribunal Review / Review of Debarment and Substantive Dismissal of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant was properly debarred due to administrative errors
  2. 2 Whether the withdrawal of the Claimant's case in May 2003 was effective and binding
  3. 3 Whether the Claimant was discriminated against due to disability by refusal of reasonable adjustments

Ratio Decidendi

The withdrawal of the Claimant's case in May 2003 by her solicitors was effective and binding, regardless of subsequent difficulties or administrative errors. The Claimant was unjustly debarred due to administrative errors, but this was corrected on review, and the substantive dismissal of the appeal was affirmed.

Court Disposition

Application for review allowed; original order dismissing the appeal affirmed.

Orders

  • Claimant is not debarred from proceedings.
  • Substantive order dismissing the appeal is affirmed.