Tweet
In the first page of the website of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) there is the following list of five possible grounds of appeal:
“• Got the law wrong
• Did not apply the correct law
• Did not follow the correct procedures and this affected the decision
• Had no evidence to support its decision
• Was unfairly biased towards the other party”
However, Section 21 of Employment Tribunals Act 1996 concerning the jurisdiction of the Employment Appeal Tribunal says:
“21Jurisdiction of Appeal Tribunal.
(1)An appeal lies to the Appeal Tribunal on any question of law arising from any decision of, or arising in any proceedings before”
Hence, it makes reference only to “question of law” but not to the two other grounds of appeal:
“Had no evidence to support its decision”
“Was unfairly biased towards the other party”,
which do not seem to be related with a “question of law”, contrary to the first page of the website of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).
Hence, I would like to know which legislation or practice makes reference to these two others grounds of appeal or the reasons why these two others grounds of appeal could be somehow related with a “question of law”
“• Got the law wrong
• Did not apply the correct law
• Did not follow the correct procedures and this affected the decision
• Had no evidence to support its decision
• Was unfairly biased towards the other party”
However, Section 21 of Employment Tribunals Act 1996 concerning the jurisdiction of the Employment Appeal Tribunal says:
“21Jurisdiction of Appeal Tribunal.
(1)An appeal lies to the Appeal Tribunal on any question of law arising from any decision of, or arising in any proceedings before”
Hence, it makes reference only to “question of law” but not to the two other grounds of appeal:
“Had no evidence to support its decision”
“Was unfairly biased towards the other party”,
which do not seem to be related with a “question of law”, contrary to the first page of the website of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT).
Hence, I would like to know which legislation or practice makes reference to these two others grounds of appeal or the reasons why these two others grounds of appeal could be somehow related with a “question of law”
