BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Harman (t/a High Cross Residential Home) v. Shaw [1999] UKEAT 412_99_1606 (16 June 1999)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/412_99_1606.html
Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 412_99_1606

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

BAILII case number: [1999] UKEAT 412_99_1606
Appeal No. EAT/412/99

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 16 June 1999

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE WILKIE QC

MR S M SPRINGER MBE

MR R N STRAKER


MRS V HARMAN T/A HIGH CROSS RESIDENTIAL HOME APPELLANT

MISS G J SHAW RESPONDENT

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING – EX PARTE

© Copyright 1999

    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellant MS DAPHNE ROMNEY
    (of Counsel)
    ELAAS
       


     

    JUDGE WILKIE QC: We are greatly indebted to Ms Romney for the assistance that she has given to Mrs Harmon under the ELAAS scheme. She has persuaded us that this appeal which should proceed to a full hearing.

  1. It seems to us that the present appeal letter of 15th March against the refusal to extend time, really is an untutored letter and entirely misses the point. The point is that it is said by Mrs Harmon that she did apply for extended reasons in good time, i.e., by letter sent on or about 2nd November 1998 by post to the Employment Tribunal. If that be the case, then the Employment Tribunal erred in law in failing to provide her with the extended reasons. We think that that basis of appeal should be placed on record as a matter of amendment and no doubt Ms Romney can assist Mrs Harmon further by drafting that.

  2. In addition, because this is a matter which really turns on the operation section of s.7 of the Interpretation Act 1978, which requires some evidence in a proper form that it was sent by post, we direct that Mrs Harmon should, within 14 days, file with the Employment Appeal Tribunal an affidavit confirming that on 2nd November 1998 she did write the letter which appears at page 4 of the bundle, and did post it on or about 2nd November 1998 in the ordinary course of post. If she does not file an affidavit to that effect then we direct that the appeal be dismissed.

  3. If there is an affidavit and s. 7 operates as Ms Romney has indicated, it seems that this would be an extremely short appeal and one which we would estimate at ½ an hour.

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/412_99_1606.html