Scerbaks v Pertemps Recruitment Partnership Ltd - Despite protests of inequality, claimant had simple task to perform before tribunal [2010] EAT

An example of the EAT ensuring "equality of arms", by noting an unrepresented claimant's protests of disadvantage but ensuring that he was shown appropriate flexibility (but no more) for the simple task required of him. 

Mr Scerbaks presented a claim of unfair dismissal on 7 March 2009. For the claim to be in time (under Employment Rights Act 1996 secs 97 & 111) would require an effective date of termination (EDT) of no earlier than 8 December 2008: however an Employment Judge (EJ) concluded, on the evidence, that the EDT was actually 5 December 2008. Apparently both parties gave unsatisfactory evidence, but Mr Scerbak's continual references to events earlier than 8th December persuaded the EJ to accept Pertemps' arguments that he had actually resigned on 5th.  

The full content of this page is available to subscribers only. Please purchase a subscription if you feel this content will be of use to you.

Case Summary Tag: 

Login or subscribe (includes subscription information) to access the full content of this page.