Claimant v Shahid Karim 247 Logistics Ltd — 2018

The claimant applied on 10 April 2018 for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 4 April 2018. Employment Judge Sigsworth refused the application. The judgment records that the question was whether there was any reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked.

In considering that issue, the tribunal found that the respondent’s email of 10 November 2017 did not show that the respondent knew an extension-of-time request had to be accompanied by a draft response. The response had been due on 2 November 2017; the extension request was dated 10 November 2017 and sought time to 24 November 2017; and the response was provided on 24 November 2017. The judge also noted that the response did not appear to have been on the file when default judgment was signed on 18 December 2017, and that when Employment Judge Ord gave the direction on 2 December 2017 he could not have seen that response.

The tribunal applied the guidance in Kwiksave Stores Ltd v Swain & Others [1997] ICR 49 when assessing the earlier extension-of-time issue under rule 20. It found the delay was 22 days, that the explanation given was awaiting insurers and then finding private representation, that the balance of prejudice favoured the respondent, and that the defence appeared arguable. The judge therefore concluded that there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being changed. The judgment also states that the tribunal was not misled by the respondent and that any separate non-compliance with an earlier case management order would be dealt with separately.