Johnson v Ruck SSC Ltd

An appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal is not instituted in time merely by lodging a notice of appeal within 42 days. It must also include the prescribed supporting documents, or an explanation for their absence, as required by the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 and the Practice Direction.

Time limits apply equally to litigants in person and represented parties. They are relaxed only in rare and exceptional circumstances. A simple error in failing to attach essential documents, particularly where an appellant waits until shortly before the deadline, does not justify an extension of time.

The Employment Tribunal at Bristol dismissed the claimant's numerous complaints after a three-day hearing. Its judgment and reasons were sent to the parties on 7 November 2011, making 19 December 2011 the final day for an appeal.

The claimant lodged a notice of appeal before that date but omitted documents required to institute an appeal, including the Employment Tribunal judgment and reasons. He supplied the judgment and reasons on 22 December 2011. The Registrar refused to register the appeal as out of time.

The claimant appealed from the Registrar's order. The central issues were whether the required material had in fact been sent in time and, if not, whether the delay should exceptionally be excused.

1. The appeal from the Registrar's order was dismissed. The appeal was not properly instituted until 22 December 2011, after expiry of the 42-day limit. The claimant's first email contained the notice of appeal, some pleadings and material about computer-virus difficulties, but not the Employment Tribunal judgment and reasons. Those documents first appeared in his later email.

2. Under Rule 3 of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 and paragraph 3.5 of the Practice Direction, a notice of appeal must be accompanied by the prescribed documents or an explanation for their absence. An incomplete notice cannot be treated as a timely appeal simply because it was sent before the deadline.

3. The Tribunal applied the established strict approach to extensions of time. The rules apply equally to unrepresented appellants. Departure from the time limit requires a rare and exceptional case; the merits were not advanced and did not fall to be assessed.

4. The claimant's computer problems did not create an exceptional circumstance. Once his system was restored, he did not promptly check the attachments, obtain copies from the Employment Tribunal, contact the other side or allow sufficient time for the EAT to identify and permit correction of any defect. His failure to attach the judgment and reasons was a simple, unexplained error. The application for an extension was therefore dismissed.

• Employment Appeal Tribunal: appeal from the Registrar's refusal to register the notice of appeal dismissed.
• Employment Tribunal, Bristol: the claimant's substantive complaints were dismissed following a three-day hearing. The judgment and reasons were sent on 7 November 2011.