Legal News

Early conciliation certificate valid despite naming two prospective respondents (De Mota v (1) ADR Network (2) Co-operative Group)

Early conciliation certificate valid despite naming two prospective respondents (De Mota v (1) ADR Network (2) Co-operative Group)
Published on: 20 September 2017
Published by: LexisPSL
  • Early conciliation certificate valid despite naming two prospective respondents (De Mota v (1) ADR Network (2) Co-operative Group)
  • Original news
  • What is the impact of this case?
  • What is the relevant law?
  • What were the background facts?
  • What did the employment tribunal decide?
  • What did the Employment Appeal Tribunal decide?
  • Case details

Article summary

Employment analysis: Section 18A(8) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 (ETA 1996), which prohibits a claimant from presenting an employment tribunal claim for relevant proceedings unless they have an early conciliation (EC) certificate, focuses on the existence of the certificate and not the details of compliance with the process leading up to the issuing of the certificate by Acas. Therefore, a claimant is not barred from issuing proceedings if, despite mistakenly naming two respondents on the same EC notification form, Acas accepts that notification and issues him with an EC certificate. Further, the resultant EC certificate is a valid certificate for the purposes of section 18A(8) even though it names two prospective respondents instead of just one, according to the EAT. or take a trial to read the full analysis.

Popular documents