The day before her hearing, Ms Fadina requested an adjournment because she was unwell and sent a sick note stating that she was suffering from stress and anxiety. The tribunal rejected the request and said there was no physical reason why Fadina could not attend. The EAT noted that the tribunal had not contacted Fadina or her representative before considering the adjournment, and had made assumptions about her medical condition without investigating it. It had jumped to conclusions that were not supported by facts, and Fadina’s case was sent to a different tribunal for hearing.

Fadina v Government Car and Despatch Agency EAT/0264/04

Mr O’Cathail made a last minute request for an adjournment, attaching medical evidence showing that he had caught a respiratory infection and needed a week’s rest. The tribunal refused the request and went on to dismiss his claim on all counts. O’Cathail appealed. The EAT overturned the decision. It noted that in most cases, refusing an adjournment will not threaten the overall fairness of the outcome, and adjournments will only ever be allowed for “pressing” reasons, but this was a rare example where refusing an adjournment jeopardised fairness. O’Cathail had asked for an adjournment until he was medically fit to attend. His illness was both genuine and time-limited, so the tribunal could not justify a refusal when the evidence showed he was unfit. The EAT found that it was “plainly wrong” to deprive O’Cathail of a fair hearing in these circumstances.

Mr G O’Cathail v Transport for London [2011] UKEAT/0247/11/MAA