Chester 01244 405555

Grosvenor Court
Foregate Street Chester
Cheshire CH1 1HG
DX: 19990 Chester

Shrewsbury 01743 443 043

Lakeside House
Oxon Business Park
Shrewsbury SY3 5HJ
DX: 148563 Shrewsbury 14

Airport City, Manchester 0844 800 8346

Office 129
Manchester Business Park
3000 Aviator Way
Manchester M22 5TG

Send us a message
Our Offices

The Employment Tribunal should not conduct its own research

17th December, 2014

The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) has held in a recent case that the Employment Tribunal (ET) committed a procedural error by undertaking its own research that supported the Claimant’s case and then relied upon that research in its conclusions.

The Claimant, who suffered from depression, brought claims for unfair dismissal and discrimination on the grounds of disability. In considering her claim for discrimination, the Tribunal had to determine whether her depression rendered her disabled for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, in a way that has a significant effect on her ability to carry out normal day to day activities.

Following uncertainty as to the dosage the Claimant received for her depression, the Tribunal retired and, despite neither party raising it as an issue, conducted its own research on the internet in respect of her prescription where it appeared that she had been prescribed the maximum recommended dosage. The Tribunal proceeded to question the Claimant thoroughly on that basis and whether she was considered by her Doctor to be “severely depressed”.

Rule 41 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013 (SI 2013/1237) emphasises that the Tribunal should “seek to avoid undue formality and may itself question the parties or any witnesses so far as appropriate in order to clarify the issues or elicit the evidence”. However, the EAT held, on appeal by the Respondent, that the Tribunal had made a procedural error of law. Whilst Rule 41 allows the Tribunal to make enquiries, the Tribunal cannot enquire into evidence which was never volunteered by either party, and then rely on that evidence.

The EAT further concluded that the tribunal had taken a hostile view towards the Trust and that it should not continue to hear the case

In consequence, the President of the EAT has set out some guidance in relation to bundles of authorities that are submitted to the employment tribunal or the EAT remarking that parties should highlight passages that are specifically being relied upon in Tribunal.

Whilst Claimants and Respondents alike are entitled to represent themselves at Tribunal, we would strongly urge any party to proceedings to seek profession advice and representation at an early stage.

For further information and advice in relation to any of the issues raised above, please contact Paul Bennett on 01743 453 685 or send an email to [email protected].

You might also be interested in...

Is there such a thing as a good divorce?

22nd November, 2018

Family Law Partner Sandy Edwards believes there is. Next week, from 26 to 30 November, Resolution, an organisation of 6,500 family lawyers and other professionals, will be promoting “Good Divorce Week” which will focus on how separating and divorcing couples can put their children’s needs first and limit the impact of conflict. The week falls during the government’s divorce... Read More »

Ethics Guidance – Transparency in Price and Service

16th November, 2018

It is reported that a quarter of all complaints dealt with by the Legal Ombudsman revolve around costs. Therefore to avoid complaints and confusion, it is important to be clear from the outset. The new Transparency Rules (which the SRA have now confirmed will come into effect on 6 December 2018) require that accurate and relevant information is... Read More »

Aaron & Partners Increases Recommendations in Leading Industry Guide, The Legal 500

5th November, 2018

Aaron & Partners LLP has once again seen improved rankings in The Legal 500 – a comprehensive guide... Read More »

Contact Us