Mr B Lacey v Drift Bridge Garage Ltd and P Cue: 2301190/2022
JUDGMENT
Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21[1]The claim was issued in the London South Employment Tribunals on 06 April 2022. The respondent has failed to present a valid response on time. The Employment Judge has decided that a determination can properly be made of the claim, or part of it, in accordance with rule 21 of the Rules of Procedure.[2]The claim succeeds and the remedy to which the claimant is entitled will be determined at a Remedy Hearing. RECONSIDERATION JUDGMENT[1]The Judgment of 21 July 2022 sent to the partis on 4 August 2022 is revoked in its entirety.[2]The Respondents’ response which was filed by email on 11 May 2022 is accepted.REASONS
[1]I gave default judgment in this case because it appeared from the file that no responses had been entered by the Respondents.[2]However, the true position is that a response for both Respondents was entered on 11 May 2022 and thus in time. It appears that the tribunal’s administration did not register this because there was an error in the claim number cited in the subject line of the covering email (though not in the attached form ET3 itself).[3]I am satisfied that the Respondents entered responses on time and thus that my judgment of 21 July 2022 must be revoked in full.[4]Further case management orders will be given in due course for the onward conduct of the claim.