Date: 2017-04-21 16:00
Secondly, the ET must be careful to limit itself to answering the questions asked by the EAT. It must be careful not to act as an advocate for its own decision. In this case, the ET provided notes of evidence and commented directly on the notice of appeal. This, the Court of Appeal, concluded went beyond the scope of the Burns / Barke process.
The web pages currently in English on the EDD website are the official and accurate source for the program information and services the EDD provides. Any discrepancies or differences created in the translation are not binding and have no legal effect for compliance or enforcement purposes. If any questions arise related to the information contained in the translated website, please refer to the English version.
Firstly, it is important for the EAT to focus its questions and clearly identify where the ET 8767 s reasoning may be inadequate. It is not appropriate to ask a general question or to ask the ET to supplement its decision if it has already adequately explained its reasoning.
Interlocutory orders may be issued in a Divorce proceeding to prevent injury or irreparable harm during the pendency of the lawsuit. For example, an interlocutory order may require one spouse to pay the other spouse a designated weekly sum for support, pending a decision on Alimony and Child Support. This prevents the spouse and children from being without income during the action.
This means it 8767 s worth making it really clear in your notice of appeal what kind (s) of error of law you 8767 re alleging. There aren 8767 t that many different kinds so if you can 8767 t identify each thing you say is wrong with the ET 8767 s decision as one the following short list of types, it 8767 s probably not an error of law you 8767 re looking at.
There are exceptions of course. Occasionally there is an employment tribunal decision so bad that there is an almost infinite number of ways of describing what 8767 s wrong with it. If you 8767 re faced with one of those, your task is quite hard: drafting grounds of appeal will feel a bit like performing an autopsy on a frog that 8767 s been through a liquidiser. It 8767 s clearly not a functioning frog any more it 8767 s frog puree but how to put a finger on what precisely is wrong with it? But even in that kind of case, you will do better to make your 8 or 9 best points you only need to win the case once, after all.
This is when the ET has misunderstood the legislation or the case-law. So, for example, if they 8767 ve said in an unfair dismissal case 8766 having found that the Claimant was guilty of gross misconduct, we have no option but to uphold the dismissal as fair 8767 that would be wrong, because the ET 8767 s job is to decide whether the employer acted fairly in dismissing, not whether it thinks the employee was guilty of gross misconduct.
There are, however, circumstances when you might want to hold off. For example, if there is a chance that the Respondent will pay an existing award before learning of your appeal to increase it, but will become reluctant once they realise that an appeal is being made, you might want to put off the point at which they will learn of it. This is a tad ruthless, but perfectly within the rules.
The ALJ will issue a written decision to all interested individuals. The decision includes information about Filing a Second Level Appeal to the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board (Appeals Board.)
But there could be circumstances in which you 8767 d want to appeal instead. For example, if you are appealing on a number of other grounds as well, it may seem more sensible to appeal, and have the whole case dealt with by the EAT rather than applying for an appeal and a review. Generally I suspect that this approach is unlikely to find favour with the EAT, but it might work in the right case.