EAT allows appeal against failure to hold a hearing following default judgment
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has published the judgment given in Brown v East Hanningfield Pre-School [2025] EAT 201, addressing the circumstances in which it is appropriate to bring a claim to an end by the issue of a judgment under Rule 21 without also holding a hearing.
The Claimant had issued a claim for unpaid wages, failure to provide a payslip and P45, whilst also indicating that she may wish to amend her claim and had received advice that she would be able to do so. The Employment Tribunal issued a Rule 21 judgment for the claims expressly stated in the claim form and vacated the final hearing, bringing the claim to an end.
On the Claimant’s appeal, His Honour Judge Beard sitting in the EAT decided that case management decision was perverse. There were sufficient facts set out in the ET1 to show that other claims could have been brought, whether by amendment or clarification to the existing claim. The Judge should also have had regard to the assistance that the Claimant would have been given in clarifying her claims at a preliminary hearing (as per the principles set out in Cox v Adecco [2021] ICR 1307 and Moustache v Chelsea and Westminster NHS Trust [2025] EWCA Civ 185). In those circumstances, the Judge should either have asked for further information or listed a hearing. The claim was remitted to the Employment Tribunal.
Sam Way, instructed through Advocate, represented the Appellant in the EAT.
Back to News
