Appeal No.	 EAT/602/99

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

	At the Tribunal
	On 28 July 1999

Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE D M LEVY QC
LORD DAVIES OF COITY CBE
MR P A L PARKER CBE

MRS B P MORTON	APPELLANT

DR A R MIR	RESPONDENT

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING

Revised

	APPEARANCES

For the Appellant	MR I MORTON
(Son)

	JUDGE LEVY:	This is a sad appeal.  Mrs Morton submitted an IT1 to an Industrial Tribunal, as did a number of her colleagues following the termination of her employment.  Box 1 in the IT1 was not completed, but in Box 11 she said:

“I was made redundant by Dr Mir my employer without any notice after seven years service and without any redundancy money being paid since 11 June 1998 which has caused me tremendous personal financial hardship.”

1	She did not date the application form sent to the Tribunal and the date on which it was received was 14 September 1998.  If, as she stated, her employment ended on 11 June 1998, it was received more than three months after that date and was thus received out of time.  When the matter came on for hearing, she chose not to attend that day.  She thought it was not necessary, we understand, because she thought she had an open and shut case.  Unhappily, the point was taken that her application was presented out of time.  The experienced Chairman hearing her case and that of others drew attention to Article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction England and Wales Order 1994, and said in paragraph 7 of the Extended Reasons:

“Neither Mrs Mewes nor Mrs Morton [the Appellant today] attended the hearing, and there was therefore no evidence before me on which I could find that it was not reasonably practicable for me to have presented their complaints in time.”

He then dealt with other claims which he dismissed and he also felt it appropriate to dismiss that of Mrs Morton for want of jurisdiction.

2	From that decision, Mrs Morton appealed by a Notice of Appeal dated 15 April 1998.  In her Notice of Appeal she said that her complaint was sent via first class post on 10 September 1998.  Unhappily what she says in her Notice of Appeal dated 15 April 1999 was not before the learned Chairman who heard her application.  On the evidence before him, he was in our judgment absolutely entitled to reach the decision which he did.  

3	We would like, if we could have found grounds to do so, to have interfered with his decision, but it was quite clearly a proper decision made in the circumstances on the evidence; thus we have no power to allow the appeal.  In the circumstances we cannot let it to go forward to a full hearing and thus we will dismiss it at this stage.  We would thank Mr Morton, the Appellant’s son, who has appeared before us this morning for the submissions which he has made to us.  As we have endeavoured to explain to him, we would have liked to help his mother, but we cannot.