Leicester City Council v Patel Posted In: Case Law
Decision NumberEAT 109
Legal BodyEmployment Appeals Tribunal (EAT)
Type of Claim / JurisdictionTribunal Practice, Procedures and Jurisdictional Issues
The claimant was dismissed in December 2019 and in March 2020 she went through the early conciliation process receiving a certificate naming the respondent as ‘Leicester City Council’. However, when she presented her claim using the ET1 form she referred to the respondent as ‘Leicestershire City Council’. It should be noted that the details of the claim did correctly refer to the respondent.
The claim was rejected under Schedule 1, Paragraph 12(1)(f) of the 2013 Regulations on the basis that the prospective respondent on the certificate as not the same as that within the ET1 form. The claimant applied for reconsideration of the decision to reject the claim. She argued that it would not be
Already a subscriber?
Click here to login and access the full article.Log in now to read the full article
Don't miss out, start your free trial today!
Are you fully aware of the benefits of Legal-Island's Employment Law Update Service? We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact on your business.
Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
Ensure your organisation’s policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team at Worthingtons Solicitors
The information in this article is provided as part of Legal-Island's Employment Law Hub. We regret we are not able to respond to requests for specific legal or HR queries and recommend that professional advice is obtained before relying on information supplied anywhere within this article.