The Court of Appeal in the case of Anderson -v- Turning Point Eespro has ruled that an Employment Tribunal acted fairly by adjourning a Remedy Hearing to allow an unrepresented claimant who suffered from mental health problems to obtain representation.

The claimant had won a claim for sex discrimination. The tribunal had to determine what remedy was appropriate. The issues that were to be determined were complex. Due to her mental health problems, the tribunal were not satisfied that the claimant could deal with the matter without representation.   The Tribunal therefore adjourned the Remedy Hearing and advised the claimant to seek representation. When the hearing resumed, the Court of Appeal stated that the Employment Tribunal had been entitled to trust that the representative for the claimant would request any further adjustments to ensure that a disabled person had the opportunity to benefit from a fair hearing, in accordance with the Overriding Objective of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure (2013). The Court of Appeal stated that this did not mean that there was a rule that in every case a vulnerable or disabled witness required a hearing or the tribunal to set the procedural parameters for the fair treatment of a vulnerable defendant (a Ground Rules Hearing) but stated that whilst fairness was required, it would depend on the facts of every particular case.

If you have any queries surrounding any employment dispute matter, please do not hesitate to contact one of our experts, Mark Hirst at MHirst@bromleys.co.uk or Rachael Frankland at RFrankland@bromleys.co.uk

Or alternatively you can call our offices on 0161 330 6821

The contents of this article are intended for general information purposes only and shall not be deemed to be, or constitute legal advice. We cannot accept responsibility for any loss as a result of acts or omissions taken in respect of this article.