Does the fact that a claim is rejected for mis-naming the Respondent, prevent it from being 'not reasonably practicable' to have presented a claim in time?
No, held the EAT in The Sports PR Company Ltd v Cardona.
The Claimant presented a claim to a tribunal for unpaid wages. She correctly named her employer on the ACAS EC Certificate, but on the ET1 used an individual director's name as the person against whom she was bringing the claim. The error was corrected, but only once the claim was already out of time.
The tribunal decided that it was a reasonable error to have made as the wording on the ET1 was ambiguous. It therefore found that it was not reasonably practicable to have presented the claim in time, and that the short delay thereafter was reasonable.
Rejecting an argument on appeal, that reaching different conclusions was in some way "reversing" the first decision, HHJ Auerbach said:
"...the tribunal was concerned with applying two different tests in different contexts and on different occasions."
Thanks to Matthew Jackson of Albion Chambers for preparing this case summary.
Comments