Margaret Gallacher v T&C Bars Limited & Anor
[2024] EAT 15
S Palihakkara v The English Sport Council
3 March 2023
[2023] EAT 27
Employment Appeal Tribunal
Someone's appeal was very late. Even though they had mental health issues, they'd filed other appeals on time, and the case was already decided, so the judge threw out the late appeal.
Key Facts
- •Claimant's appeal against Employment Tribunal (ET) judgment was lodged 675 days late.
- •Claimant suffered from mental health problems during the relevant period.
- •Registrar refused to extend time for lodging the appeal.
- •Claimant appealed the Registrar's decision to the EAT.
- •Claimant had previously lodged a timely appeal against a different ET decision.
- •The ET's decision that the claimant appeals against involved an unless order.
- •The merits hearing of the claimant's claims had already concluded.
Legal Principles
Appeals from the Registrar's refusal to extend time require a fresh decision by the EAT Judge.
Muschett v London Borough of Hounslow [2009] ICR 424
An extension of time is an indulgence, requiring a good explanation for the delay.
United Arab Emirates v Abdelghafar and anor [1995] ICR 65; Aziz v Bethnal Green City Challenge Co Ltd [2000] IRLR 111 CA
Mental health difficulties are a relevant consideration, but must explain the entire delay.
J v K [2019] EWCA Civ 5
Even unrepresented parties must comply with time limits; ignorance is no excuse.
Abdelghafar
The merits of the appeal may be considered if it is academic or without merit.
Outcomes
EAT refused the application to extend time.
Claimant's mental health issues did not fully explain the 675-day delay, particularly given her ability to file a timely appeal in another case and to continue engaging with the ET. The delay rendered the appeal academic, as the merits hearing had already concluded.
EAT dismissed the appeal against the Registrar's order.
No good explanation was provided for the significant delay, and the appeal was considered meritless and academic.