| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2002] All ER (D) 58 (Jan) |
| Court: | Employment Appeal Tribunal |
| Judge: | Maurice Kay J, Lord Gladwin of Clee and Mrs R Chapman |
| Judgment Dates: | 16 January 2002 |
Catchwords
Employment - Costs - Order for costs - Tribunal finding appellant's action having no reasonable prospect of success - Tribunal ordering appellant to pay deposit to continue proceedings - Appellant's claim struck out for non payment of deposit - Appellant appealing decision - Appellant submitting that deposit decision was susceptible to review on the application of a party - Whether tribunal erring - Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993, rr 7, 16.
The Case
The Employment Appeal Tribunal held that, inter alia, r16 of the Schedule to the Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 was not a gateway to 'directions on any matter arising in connection with' proceedings which had long since been the subject of a lawful strike out order. Accordingly, the appeal against the order to pay the 100 deposit and the subsequent striking out for non compliance would be dismissed.
Practice Areas
Lexis®Library
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
