We use cookies to improve your website experience. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. By continuing to use the website, you consent to our use of cookies. Close

Breach of an unless order

Litigation Letter

Breach of an unless order

Neary v Governing Body of St Albans Girls’ School and another [2009] EWCA Civ 1190

Parliament deliberately did not incorporate r3.9(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules into employment tribunal practice when it chose to incorporate the overriding objective. That was because employment tribunal proceedings are intended to be a short, simple and informal as possible. High Court and county court practice accordingly differed from that of employment tribunals. Nor should the rules requirements be incorporated by judicial decision. While a judge should of course consider all relevant factors and avoid considering any irrelevant ones, and he may might find the factors within r3.9(1) to a be a helpful checklist, he was not under a duty expressly to set out his views on every one of those factors. The court overruled the line of EAT authority developed from Goldman Sachs v Montali ([2002] ICR 1251) and Maresca v Motor Insurance Repair Research Centre ([2005] ICR 197) requiring specific consideration of all the factors in r3.9(1).

The rest of this document is only available to i-law.com online subscribers.

If you are already a subscriber, please enter your details below to log in.

Enter your email address to log in as a user on your corporate account.
Remember me on this computer

Not yet an i-law subscriber?

Devices

Request a trial Find out more