The claimant, a litigant in person, brought claims of unfair dismissal and harassment against the respondent.  This claim was dismissed and the Tribunal refused her application for reconsideration.

The claimant sought to appeal to the EAT.  She filed an appeal notice via email on 9th February 2021.  There are 42 days given to submit an appeal which would have expired on 16th February.  The appeal notice, however, did not attach the grounds of her claim.  The claimant was contacted on 16th February being informed that her attachments could not be opened and they would have to be resent.  She resent those attachments and the next day she was informed that the grounds of claim attachment was not there.  She responded within 30 minutes attaching the document.  As her appeal was officially received on 17th February it was then a day out of time.

The claimant applied for an extension of time bearing in mind the circumstances.  This was refused by a registrar which she appealed to the EAT.  The EAT examined the documents noting that the grounds of claim ran to some 72 paragraphs and as a result it was essential for the appeal to be properly instituted.  Therefore, it was correct to say that it was filed on 17th February and not some earlier date.   The issue then fell to whether time should be extended.   The EAT noted that there was a strict approach to be adopted for extensions to the EAT considering it is an appellate court. They outlined that litigants in person were not entitled to any greater time or discretion, the rules outlining the procedure for an appeal were accessible and clear and the 42 day time limit was generous.  The EAT did acknowledge that it was a genuine error or oversight from the claimant but noted that such errors were not acceptable excuses.  Additionally, the fact that the delay was short was not a sufficient reason to extend the time as there was a policy point in ensuring that time limits were applied with certainty as it ensured finality to litigation, especially in this context.  Therefore, as the claimant was unable to demonstrate any compelling exceptional reason for time to be extended the appeal was dismissed.

Practical Lessons:

This case demonstrates the importance of time limits in the context of appellate courts.  Whilst there is no EAT in Northern Ireland the sentiment being expressed by the EAT is still valid.   It may seem very unreasonable not to extend time considering the factual background but considering that in appeals the individual has already been within the ‘system’ for their case they ought to ensure that they have their appeal submitted on time and properly.