United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

BAILII case number: [1993] UKEAT 376_93_0111

Appeal No. EAT/376/93

EMPOLYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL

58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

At the Tribunal

On 1 November 1993

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE J BULL QC

MR T S BATHO

MR A FERRY MBE

---

MISS S J E GRANT          APPELLANT

THE COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION          RESPONDENTS

---

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

Revised


 


---

APPEARANCES

For the Appellant IN PERSON

For the Respondents NO APPEARANCE BY OR

REPRESENTATION ON

BEHALF OF THE

RESPONDENTS


 


JUDGE BULL QC: This is an ex parte Preliminary Hearing of an appeal by Miss Grant against the Interlocutory Decision of the Chairman of the Industrial Tribunal sitting at London North evinced by his letter dated 16 April 1993 by which he refused to extend yet further the 21 days which he had granted on 18 February 1993 for the submission of a Race Relations Questionnaire to be prepared by Miss Grant.

Miss Grant has appeared before us in person and has detailed the misfortunes which have beset her and whilst we have sympathy for her, we wholly endorse the views of the Chairman at the Interlocutory Hearing on 18 February 1993 in which he asserted:

"...in multi-party proceedings it is essential to clarify the triable issues and maintain effective administrative control and expressed his concern that the proceedings should be pursued diligently, particularly having regard to the fact that the Applicants [including this Appellant before us] are students who have to make plans for their future careers."

It is contended in this appeal by Miss Grant that the Chairman erred in his assumption that her interests as only one of ten applicants would not be prejudiced by refusing a further extension of time. There is no opposition to her application by the Respondents who point out in their letter of 8 June 1993:

"It is unlikely that any question that Miss Grant would have had to raise in her questionnaire would not have been raised in one or other of the other questionnaires".

We are narrowly persuaded that in the particular circumstances of this appeal there may be some point in what has been raised by Miss Grant and we do grant the indulgence of a further 7 days from today's date for the submission of her questionnaire. There must be no question of any further extension of that period of time.

We emphasise that this decision marks no precedent whatsoever. Indeed it should serve to re-enforce the view of the Chairman that these proceedings must be pursued with diligence. To that extent therefore this appeal is allowed. We extend the time for the submission of the questionnaire by 7 days from today's date.