[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Scully v. Community Health Service NHS Trust [2000] UKEAT 234_00_1406 (14 June 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/234_00_1406.html Cite as: [2000] UKEAT 234__1406, [2000] UKEAT 234_00_1406

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR BIRKBY Advisor


 


HIS HONOUR JUDGE WILCOX:

1. We are dealing with a limited question here; it is whether there is any warrant for interfering with a Tribunal's decision about providing extended reasons. There is a time limit set down during which, extended reasons should be asked for. It is 21 days. It is clearly a matter that is known to those who advise in this sort of case. We take into account the fact that the Appellant was under some degree of psychiatric disadvantage. We have had sick notes put before us; there has been various documentation puts before us, that testify to that. We take account of it.
2. We are told on behalf of Mr Scully that similar documentation was put before the Tribunal, on 9 November 1999. It was then that they ruled that the Originating Application was 13 months out of time. They clearly considered why and whether it would have been practicable to in fact serve it within the time limit. The evidence is that Mr Scully by 10 November following that adjudication was aggrieved at it. We know that because it is a matter of record that despite his difficulties, he was live enough and sensible enough to write to the Tribunal at length. He wrote a number of letters to the Tribunal that were referred to in the letter from the Employment Tribunal's 14 East Parade, Sheffield on 24 November 1999.
3. It is our view that he would have been live to matters such as time limits. His advisors certainly would have been because the whole object of the hearing on 9 November was to enquire into and consider an application to extend the time limit in relation to which an Originating Application should have been served. We think that there is no merit in this short point and we therefore have taken the view that there is no arguable case upon this limited issue to go to a full Tribunal. We dismiss the appeal.