The Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
13 Rejection: substantive defects
(1) Tribunal staff must refer a claim to the Tribunal if they consider that the claim, or part of it, may be— (a) one which the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider, (b) one which does not contain any grounds on which the claimant relies, cannot sensibly be responded to or is an abuse of process, (c) one which institutes relevant proceedings and is made on a claim form that does not contain either an early conciliation number or confirmation that an early conciliation exemption applies, (d) one which institutes relevant proceedings and is made on a claim form which contains confirmation that one of the early conciliation exemptions applies, and an early conciliation exemption does not apply, (e) one which institutes relevant proceedings and the early conciliation number on the claim form is not the same as the early conciliation number on the early conciliation certificate, (f) one which institutes relevant proceedings and the name of the claimant on the claim form is not the same as the name of the prospective claimant on the early conciliation certificate to which the early conciliation number relates, or (g) one which institutes relevant proceedings and the name of the respondent on the claim form is not the same as the name of the prospective respondent on the early conciliation certificate to which the early conciliation number relates. (2) The Tribunal must reject a claim, or part of it, if it considers that the claim, or part of it, is of a kind described in sub-paragraphs (a), (b), (c) or (d) of paragraph (1). (3) The Tribunal must reject a claim, or part of it, if it considers that the claim is of a kind described in sub-paragraph (e) of paragraph (1), unless the Tribunal considers that the claimant made an error in relation to an early conciliation number and it would not be in the interests of justice to reject the claim, or part of it. (4) The Tribunal must reject a claim, or part of it, if it considers that the claim, or part of it, is of a kind described in sub-paragraphs (f) or (g) of paragraph (1), unless the Tribunal considers that the claimant made an error in relation to a name or address and it would not be in the interests of justice to reject the claim, or part of it. (5) If a claim, or part of it, is rejected, the Tribunal must send a copy of the claim form to each claimant together with a notice of rejection giving the Tribunal’s reasons for rejecting the claim, or part of it. The notice must contain information about how a claimant may apply for a reconsideration of the rejection.
13 Rejection: substantive defects
(1) Tribunal staff must refer a claim to the Tribunal if they consider that the claim, or part of it, may be— (a) one which the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to consider, (b) one which does not contain any grounds on which the claimant relies, cannot sensibly be responded to or is an abuse of process, (c) one which institutes relevant proceedings and is made on a claim form that does not contain either an early conciliation number or confirmation that an early conciliation exemption applies, (d) one which institutes relevant proceedings and is made on a claim form which contains confirmation that one of the early conciliation exemptions applies, and an early conciliation exemption does not apply, (e) one which institutes relevant proceedings and the early conciliation number on the claim form is not the same as the early conciliation number on the early conciliation certificate, (f) one which institutes relevant proceedings and the name of the claimant on the claim form is not the same as the name of the prospective claimant on the early conciliation certificate to which the early conciliation number relates, or (g) one which institutes relevant proceedings and the name of the respondent on the claim form is not the same as the name of the prospective respondent on the early conciliation certificate to which the early conciliation number relates. (2) The Tribunal must reject a claim, or part of it, if it considers that the claim, or part of it, is of a kind described in sub-paragraphs (a), (b), (c) or (d) of paragraph (1). (3) The Tribunal must reject a claim, or part of it, if it considers that the claim is of a kind described in sub-paragraph (e) of paragraph (1), unless the Tribunal considers that the claimant made an error in relation to an early conciliation number and it would not be in the interests of justice to reject the claim, or part of it. (4) The Tribunal must reject a claim, or part of it, if it considers that the claim, or part of it, is of a kind described in sub-paragraphs (f) or (g) of paragraph (1), unless the Tribunal considers that the claimant made an error in relation to a name or address and it would not be in the interests of justice to reject the claim, or part of it. (5) If a claim, or part of it, is rejected, the Tribunal must send a copy of the claim form to each claimant together with a notice of rejection giving the Tribunal’s reasons for rejecting the claim, or part of it. The notice must contain information about how a claimant may apply for a reconsideration of the rejection.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
How this law is officially changed
Solon does not know this law's official route yet. The proposal is recorded all the same, and the route appears here once its source is added.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.