In this post we’re going to take a look at an Employment Appeal Tribunal judgment that was released last year: Fairbank v Care Management Group UKEAT/0139/12/JOJ. This case looks at the powers of an Employment Judge and whether they’re

  1. What were the facts of Fairbank v Care Management Group?
  2. What is the law relating to what should be in an ET1?
  3. What was the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s judgment?
  4. What our employment solicitors think about this case

What were the facts of Fairbank v Care Management Group?

The Claimants (Mr Fairbank and Mr Evans) in Fairbank v Care Management Group submitted their ET1 claim forms to the Employment Tribunal. These claim forms were fairly lengthy – Mr Fairbank’s claim ran to 27 pages and 66 paragraphs, whilst Mr Evans’ ran to 27 pages and 69 paragraphs. The Employment Tribunal ordered that the Claimants must reduce their claims to a “minimal statement of the supporting facts” of not more than one side of A4 paper. The Claimants appealed on the following grounds: that the decisions of the Employment Judges were perverse, incorrect and an improper exercise of discretion.

What is the law relating to what should be in an ET1?

The starting point for procedural issues relating to ET1 claim forms is the infamous case of Chapman v Simon [1994] IRLR 124, where the Court of Appeal ruled that the only claims which may be pleaded in the Employment Tribunal are those raised in the claim form. However, there are no rules which prescribe the form or format in which an Employment Tribunal claim may be made, save that the claim be submitted on the prescribed ET1 claim form, and that the claimant’s name, address, the name of the respondent, the respondent’s address, and details of the claim be included.

What was the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s judgment?

The Employment Appeal Tribunal decided that the appeal should be allowed on the basis that the Employment Judges did not have the power to make the order that they did – there was no power for the Employment Judge to prescribe the content of an ET1 form (save for the above necessary inclusions). The case was therefore remitted back to the Employment Tribunal for case management discussions.

What our employment solicitors think about this case

Chris Hadrill, an unfair dismissal solicitor at Redmans, commented that “it can often be frustrating to receive relatively incomprehensible and lengthy ET1 claim forms from lay Claimants but this is an occupation hazard. Employment Tribunals should not undertake actions when they do not have the power to do so and should not – in the specific sense – curtail the length of an ET1 claim form”.

Redmans Solicitors are employment solicitors based in London

logo_website

About

Redmans Employment Team deal with employment matters for both employers and employees, including drafting employment contracts and policies, advising employers and employees on compromise agreements, handling day-to-day HR issues, advising on restructures, and handling Employment Tribunal cases for both employers and employees

Share →
Testimonials

5.00 Average

4 Reviews

Anonymous

Patient and thorough advice given to me around my Settlement Agreement

Posted 3 days ago

Anonymous

"Excellent service, getting back to you promptly giving you very good advice."

Posted 4 days ago

Anonymous

I found Chris Hadrill to be an excellent help, he is very knowledgeable and gives good ,concise ,strategic advice .He makes himself readily accessible when you need him.I would personally highly recommend him.

Posted 6 days ago

Christine

Professional, efficient and reliable service provided. I strongly recommend them and I would use this service again.

Posted 1 week ago

Our awards

Request a callback

Your name

Your email

Your telephone number

Contact us

Please feel free to discuss your own position and concerns. Contact your nearest office on:

T: 020 3397 3603
E: enquiries@redmans.co.uk
W: www.redmans.co.uk