Sir Nicholas Underhill
Sir Nicholas Underhill:
INTRODUCTION
This appeal raises an issue about the rules requiring would-be claimants in the Employment Tribunal (“the ET”) to notify the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (“ACAS”) prior to commencing proceedings so that it has the opportunity to try to resolve the dispute by conciliation. The provisions in question appear in section 18A of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (“the ETA”), the Employment Tribunals (Early Conciliation: Exemptions and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2014 (“the Early Conciliation Regulations”), and the Employment Tribunals Procedure Rules (“the Procedure Rules”) – together, “the early conciliation provisions”. I will set the relevant provisions out in full later, but for introductory purposes I need only say that they require the claimant, in most but not all cases, to include in the claim form an “early conciliation number” (“ECN”) supplied by ACAS, which shows that they have invoked the early conciliation process; and if that is not done the complaint will be rejected by the ET at the outset.
- Heading
- Sir Nicholas Underhill
- PROCEDURAL HISTORY
- THE RELEVANT LEGISLATION
- THE EARLY CONCILIATION PROVISIONS
- The Statutory Provisions
- The Early Conciliation Regulations
- The Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- THE EXTENT OF THE EARLY CONCILIATION OBLIGATIONS
- Langstaff P also approved observations made by HHJ Eady QC in Science Warehouse Ltd v Mills [2016] ICR 252 that, save for the obligation to provide contact information to ACAS, the early conciliation
- THE ISSUES
- THE APPEAL: JURISDICTION
- PARAS 29-30: “JURISDICTION”
- PARAS 31-32: CORE CONSTRUCTION
- PARAS. 33-34: CONSISTENCY WITH THE SCHEME OF THE RULES
- PARA. 35: LATE-DISCOVERED NON-COMPLIANCE
- PARAS. 37-38: THE AUTHORITIES
- PARAS. 39-40: DISMISSAL/STRIKING-OUT AS CASE MANAGEMENT
- CONCLUSION ON THE APPEAL
- THE CROSS-APPEAL: AMENDMENT
- THE ET’s DECISION
- THE APPELLANTS’ CHALLENGE
- Does section 18 A (1) apply to permission to amend?
- Was permission to amend wrong in principle?
- Judge Crosfill’s exercise of his discretion
- Conclusions
![CA-2025-000379 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1357](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_Sjvxvlx.png)