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

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Canniffe v East Riding Of Yorkshire Council [1999] UKEAT 1035_98_2605 (26 May 1999)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/1035_98_2605.html
Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 1035_98_2605

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


BAILII case number: [1999] UKEAT 1035_98_2605
Appeal No. EAT/1035/98

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 26 May 1999

Before

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MORISON (P)

(AS IN CHAMBERS)



MRS D CANNIFFE APPELLANT

EAST RIDING OF YORKSHIRE COUNCIL RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

(DIRECTIONS HEARING)

© Copyright 1999


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellant MS K MONAGHAN
    (of Counsel)
    Humberside Law Centre
    95 Alfred Gelder Street
    Hull
    HU1 1EP
    For the Respondents MS M MacPHERSON
    (of Counsel)
    Miss S Lockwood
    Head of Legal Services
    East Riding of Yorkshire Council
    County Hall
    Beverley
    East Yorkshire HU17 9BA


     

    MR JUSTICE MORISON (PRESIDENT): There is an application in this case to make significant amendments to the Notice of Appeal. I grant that application, but in doing so make it perfectly plain the basis on which this application has not been opposed by the East Riding of Yorkshire Council.

    Included within the amendment is a point relating to section 41(3) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 and its relationship between that and the Equal Treatment Directive 76/207/EEC. The Respondents are an emanation of the State. It is contended that defence provided in section 41(3) is incompatible with the rights granted by the Directive and accordingly, should be disapplied in relation to people, who are employed by an emanation of the State.

    This was not a point which was argued before the Employment Tribunal and it was made plain to me that the basis on which these strivings of Yorkshire Council would not oppose the application for leave to amend was that they reserved their position to argue, when the appeal is called on, that the Employment Appeal Tribunal should not consider this argument because it had not been advanced before the Employment Tribunal. I therefore grant the application for leave to amend on that basis.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/1035_98_2605.html