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 >> Gregory v Neston Cricket Club [1998] UKEAT 989_97_1202 (12 February 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1998/989_97_1202.html Cite as: [1998] UKEAT 989_97_1202 |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER CLARK
MR D CHADWICK
MS B SWITZER
| APPELLANT | |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
Revised
| For the Appellant | NO APPEARANCE OR REPRESENTATION BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT |
| For the Respondent | NO APPEARANCE OR REPRESENTATION BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT |
JUDGE CLARK: This is an appeal by Mr Gregory, the Applicant before the Liverpool Industrial Tribunal, sitting on 7 April 1997, against that Tribunal's decision promulgated with Extended Reasons on 23 June 1997, that although he was unfairly dismissed by the Respondent on procedural grounds, he was not entitled to any remedy since the reason for dismissal was a settled refusal on his part to obey a reasonable instruction given by his employer. His claim of wrongful dismissal was dismissed.
The Notice of Appeal dated 26 June 1997 was settled by his solicitor. On 12 November 1997 the Registrar wrote to the Appellant at his home address informing him that his solicitors had indicated that they were no longer acting, and asking him to say within seven days whether he wished to pursue or withdraw his appeal. No reply having been received to that letter, the Registrar wrote to the Appellant again on 12 December asking for a response within seven days, failing which the matter would be listed for disposal.
Again there was no reply and the case was listed for hearing today by a Notice sent to the Appellant on 26 January 1998.
The Appellant continues to take no steps to prosecute his appeal. He has not attended today. In these circumstances we shall dismiss the appeal.
