Nwakwu v Westminster City Council

[2018] UKEAT 0102_18_1709 (17 September 2018)

Case details

Case citations
[2018] UKEAT 0102_18_1709 (17 September 2018)
Court
Employment Appeal Tribunal
Judgment date
17 September 2018
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Employment law Practice and procedure Agency Workers Regulations
Keywords
remission remit to fresh tribunal time limits Agency Workers Regulations 2010 just and equitable Employment Appeal Tribunal Sinclair Roche & Temperley British Coal v Keeble
Outcome
appeal allowed (remitted to a fresh tribunal)
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

There is no automatic rule that a successful appeal must be remitted to the same tribunal.

Where fairness, the passage of time, the composition of the original tribunal and the limited factual issues make rehearing by the same tribunal inappropriate, the appeal court may remit to a fresh tribunal.

The familiar guidance in [2004] IRLR 763 remains the proper basis for this exercise.

Factual background

The appellant, an agency worker, appealed from an Employment Tribunal reserved judgment delivered 18 July 2017 which dismissed his claims.

The respondent conceded the permitted grounds of appeal that challenged the Tribunal's treatment of time limits under the Agency Workers Regulations 2010.

The sole live issue on appeal was the appropriate disposal and whether the matter should be remitted to the original tribunal or to a fresh tribunal.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal applied prior authority and remitted the discrete Agency Workers Regulations issues to a fresh judge sitting alone.

Held

  1. The appeal was conceded on the four permitted grounds and was therefore allowed on those grounds.
  2. The court applied the guidance in [2004] IRLR 763 when deciding whether to remit the matter for rehearing.
  3. The court identified relevant factors as: the significant passage of time since the original hearing; the difference in appropriate tribunal composition for AWR claims; the limited and largely agreed factual issues to be reheard; and the claimant's anxiety about confidence in the original panel. These factors rebutted the presumption in favour of remitting to the same tribunal (see paras [2]; [11]).
  4. The court held that a fresh Employment Judge sitting alone should determine the discrete AWR issues and any related assessment of time limits. Remittal to a fresh tribunal would conserve resources and avoid needless rehearing of unrelated discrimination matters (see paras [9]; [11]).
  5. Disposition: appeal allowed on the conceded grounds and remitted to a fresh Employment Tribunal for rehearing on the specified Agency Workers Regulations issues.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  • Employment Tribunal Reserved Judgment and Reasons dismissing all claims (sent 18 July 2017).
  • Employment Appeal Tribunal Appeal heard and disposed of on 17 September 2018; appeal allowed in part and remitted to a fresh Employment Tribunal for rehearing on the AWR issues.

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.