Procedure Rules (see section 37QA) are to govern the practice and procedure to be followed in employment tribunals.F40]
Definitions used in section 7 2
- Procedure Rules
“Procedure Rules” is to be read in accordance with section 37QA(2), and—
Defined in s.42(1) · see it in the full Act(a)in Part 1, means Procedure Rules in respect of employment tribunals;
(b)in Part 2, means Procedure Rules in respect of the Appeal Tribunal,
- employment
“employment” means employment under a contract of employment and “employed” shall be construed accordingly,
Defined in s.42(1) · see it in the full Act
Cases considering section 7 17
Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy v Parry & Anor
The general power to make employment tribunal procedure regulations, read with section 7(2), authorises rule 12’s pre-institution rejection mechanism. (see paras [36]; [38]–[41]) Proceedings must be instituted in accordance with procedure regulations. The Court relied on this requirement when treating rule 8 and rule 12 as governing whether proceedings have validly begun. (see paras [36]; [38]; [41]) The restrictions concerning regulations that authorise determination without a hearing do not apply because rule 12 rejection is not a determination of proceedings. In alternative reasoning, Bean LJ considered that section 7(3AA) would permit a pre-response rejection. (see paras [41]; [43]–[45]) If rule 12 rejection were a determination, Bean LJ considered that section 7(3AA) would authorise determination without a hearing before the respondent had presented a response. Newey and Arden LJJ expressed no view. (see paras [43]–[45]; [49]–[50]) Section 7(3B) did not invalidate rule 12 because rejection is not a determination of proceedings. If it were, a rule 12 rejection plus reconsideration under rule 13 would not amount to a determination at a hearing attended by the claimant. (see paras [41]; [46]) Section 7(3C) did not render rule 12(1)–(2) ultra vires because a rejection is not a determination of proceedings. (see para [41])
Richards v Manpower Services Ltd
The tribunal applied s.7(2)(e) as the statutory source for its power to order discovery and disclosure. The judgment treats that power as the basis for rules permitting disclosure orders in ET proceedings. (See para [16].)
Lynch & Ors v East Dunbartonshire Council
Section 7(2) makes it mandatory for Employment Tribunal proceedings to be instituted in accordance with Employment Tribunal regulations. This supports the conclusion that the statutory rules define the Tribunal’s procedural powers (see para [48]). Section 7(3) contemplates regulations making provision for Employment Tribunal procedure. The judgment uses this provision to reinforce the self-contained character of the 2004 Rules (see para [48]).
- Home Office v Tariq
- Sarnoff v YZ
- Home Office v Tariq
- Millicom Services UK Limited & Ors v Michael Clifford
- D Warburton v The Chief Constable of Northamptonshire Police
- Sarnoff v The Weinstein Company LLC
- Mace v Ponders End International Ltd
- Pinnock v Birmingham City Council & Anor
- Kelly, R (on the application of) v Warley Magistrates Court & Anor
5 more judgments, and what each says about section 7, are in the case-law panel in the full Act.
Amendments and notes
2 notes from legislation.gov.uk
Amendments
- F40S. 7 substituted (25.4.2024) by Judicial Review and Courts Act 2022 (c. 35), ss. 34(2), 51(4) (with s. 36); S.I. 2024/568, reg. 2(a)
Modifications
- C8S. 7 extended (24.4.2000) by 1992 c. 52, s. 239(4)(b) (as inserted (24.4.2000) by 1999 c. 26, s. 16, Sch. 5 para. 4; S.I. 2000/875, art. 2 (subject to transitional provision in art. 3))