2525 Resource Management Consulting Ltd v Steel

Where a party claims that it did not receive notice of employment tribunal proceedings, or that a decision was made in its absence, the ordinary route is an application to the tribunal to review its decision under Rule 11 of the Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedures) Regulations 1993. An appeal alleging error of law is generally not the appropriate first step. The review provisions include newly available evidence and the interests of justice. The tribunal may extend time for a late review application. A permission application may be adjourned so that this alternative remedy can first be pursued.

Mr Steel obtained an Employment Tribunal order for £1,500 net for alleged unlawful deductions from wages. The respondent company did not enter an appearance or attend the hearing. It later contended that Mr Steel had been employed by a different, insolvent company and that the proceedings had not been served on the correct respondent.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed the company's appeal, holding that the Employment Tribunal had been entitled to decide the case on the evidence available in the company's absence. The company applied to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal. The central issue was whether the alleged non-service and absence should be addressed by appeal or by review before the Employment Tribunal.

Lord Justice Mummery gave the reasons for the court; Lord Justice Dyson agreed.

1. Application adjourned. The Court of Appeal neither granted nor refused permission to appeal. It postponed a final decision pending the company’s pursuit of a review before the Employment Tribunal.
2. The complaint that the wrong company had been named, that the correct company had not received notice, and that it had therefore been absent from the hearing would ordinarily be dealt with by the Employment Tribunal’s review jurisdiction, rather than by an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal alleging an error of law.
3. Rule 11 of the Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedures) Regulations 1993 gave the tribunal power to review a decision where a party had not received notice of the proceedings, where the decision was made in that party’s absence, where qualifying new evidence had become available, or where the interests of justice required review. The court regarded these provisions as wide enough to address the circumstances raised.
4. Although the time for seeking review had expired, the Employment Tribunal had power to extend time. The company was directed to place before that tribunal the materials relied upon and seek an extension and review. The permission application could be restored after that process. If review was undertaken, an appeal might prove unnecessary; if review was refused as out of time, permission could be reconsidered.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division) On an application for permission to appeal, the court adjourned final consideration pending an application to the Employment Tribunal for an extension of time and review.
2. Employment Appeal Tribunal On 12 June 2001, dismissed the company’s appeal against the Employment Tribunal’s decision.
3. Employment Tribunal, Southampton On 18 December 2000, ordered the respondent to pay £1,500 net for unlawful deductions from wages.