Originating application does not have to make prima facie equal value case
In Dennehy v Sealink UK Ltd (21.11.86) EOR12B, the EAT rules that an originating application does not have to disclose a prima facie case that a complainant is employed on work of equal value with her...
View ArticleDiscrimination complaint need only specify minimum particulars
In Dodd v British Telecom plc (12.3.87) EOR17B, the EAT rules that a discrimination complaint is "presented", so as to stop the time limit from running, when it is received by the industrial tribunal...
View ArticlePoints of procedure 1: Time limits, directions and settlement
This is the first of two articles rounding up recent case law on employment tribunal and EAT practice and procedure.
View ArticleEmployment tribunals: Extent of duty to place details of tribunal claims in...
In R v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals, ex parte Public Concern at Work, the High Court concludes that the particulars of an originating application (IT1) that the Secretary...
View ArticleCase round-up
Joanne Magill, associate, and Claire Benson and Ceri Hughes, managing associates, at Addleshaw Goddard detail the latest rulings.
View ArticleRejection of tribunal claims
Revised to take into account the abolition of employment tribunal fees as a result of the Supreme Court's decision in R (on the application of Unison) v Lord Chancellor.
View ArticleExample claim to an employment tribunal
Updated to include information on the impact on the ET1 form of Unison's successful challenge to employment tribunal fees.
View ArticleForm for making a claim to an employment tribunal
Updated to include information on the impact on the ET1 form of Unison's successful challenge to employment tribunal fees.
View ArticleTribunal procedures and penalties
Updated to reflect the launch of the opening stage of the employment tribunal fees refund scheme on 20 October 2017.
View Article
More Pages to Explore .....