header-logo header-logo

12 June 2008
Issue: 7325 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment law

Jurkowska v Hlmad Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 231, [2008] IRLR 430

The introduction into the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) rules of the “overriding objective... to deal with cases justly” does not mean that the EAT must adopt a more relaxed approach to the extension of the 42-day time limit for appealing than that set out by the EAT in United Arab Emirates v Abdelghafar [1995] ICR 65, [1995] IRLR 243.

It will only be in rare and exceptional cases that it will be appropriate to extend time. The principles identified in Abdelghafar remain good law, although they are guidelines and every case will turn on its facts. The decision whether to extend time is pre-eminently a discretionary one for the judge. In the ordinary run of cases, it will be necessary for a good excuse for the delay to be shown. However, even if the explanation does not amount to a good excuse, there may be exceptional circumstances which still justify an extension.

Issue: 7325 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll