BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Technology House Group Plc v Andrews [1997] UKEAT 1005_97_2511 (25 November 1997)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1997/1005_97_2511.html
Cite as: [1997] UKEAT 1005_97_2511

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]


BAILII case number: [1997] UKEAT 1005_97_2511
Appeal No. EAT/1005/97

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 25 November 1997

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE B HARGROVE QC

MR J D DALY

MISS S M WILSON



TECHNOLOGY HOUSE GROUP PLC APPELLANT

MR B ANDREWS RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING

© Copyright 1997


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellant MR K SENIOR
    Representative
    Mr R Carver
    Technology House Group Plc
    Technology House
    Ridge Road
    Rotherham
    S. Yorks S65 1NS
       


     

    JUDGE B HARGROVE QC: The Appellant claims that the Respondent was not employed by them but by another Company. No formal appearance was entered by the Respondent and the alleged employers, Datacare Resources Plc, sent two letters which made the claim that the Respondent was an employee of Datacare.

    At the hearing the Appellant did not appear. It is now sought to put in a number of submissions and documents which, it is said, show that the Respondent was an employee of Datacare.

    With reasonable care, all those matters could have been placed before the Tribunal. The casual manner in which the Appellants treated the proceedings does not assist them at this stage. It is trite law that if a party decides to take no part in proceedings at trial and when the decision goes against him claims the decision is in error because there was evidence which they could have produced but elected not to do so, is not to be assisted upon the basis that there must be a trial of all the issues, at first instance, and if a party cares not to be present, not to urge his evidence, and that prevents all the issues being dealt with and such a person is excluded from alleging that the omitted matters, at a later date, on appeal, would have produced a different result. In our view there is no arguable case here and the appeal fails and is dismissed.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1997/1005_97_2511.html