BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Niceday Ltd v Oyolu [1998] UKEAT 293_98_1603 (16 March 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1998/293_98_1603.html Cite as: [1998] UKEAT 293_98_1603 |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE BELL
MR L D COWAN
MR R JACKSON
| APPELLANT | |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
| For the Appellants | MR D TATTON BROWN (of Counsel) Messrs Bolitho Way Solicitors 13/18 King's Terrace Portsmouth PO5 3AL |
MR JUSTICE BELL: We do consider that the appeal in this case merits argument before the Tribunal on a full inter partes hearing on the grounds set out in Mr Tatton Brown's Notice of Appeal and his Skeleton Argument. We do not propose to take time by merely rehearsing those points here. We have one matter only we draw attention to.
We allow the appeal to go ahead on the grounds from paragraph 1 (d) - 1 (g) which really challenge findings of fact, failures to find certain facts, and inferences which are drawn from certain matters. It is unusual to allow an appeal to go ahead on those matters unless they are absolutely plain, but we feel that they are so intertwined with grounds 1 (a) (b) and (c) that we ought not to set about any editing exercise. That raises the question of the matters in sub-paragraphs 1 - 7 of sub-paragraph (d).
Mr Tatton Brown expresses confidence that it will be possible to agree that those matters were either admitted or unchallenged, but if it is not possible to agree them he would like the Chairman's notes of evidence relating to those particular points, so that the Appeal Tribunal can judge them for itself.
It seems to us, in those circumstances, the appropriate step is to direct that the Respondent should indicate to the Appellants within 28 days whether any of the matters in sub-paragraphs (i) to (vii) are disputed. If so, which, and to what extent.
We direct that Chairman's notes be produced in relation only to any of those matters which are then put in issue. There will be a time estimate of one day, Category C.
