[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Latham v. Rimmers Music Ltd [1999] UKEAT 1118_99_2611 (26 November 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/1118_99_2611.html Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 1118_99_2611

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	NO APPEARANCE BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT


 


JUDGE WILKIE QC: This is an appeal by Mr Latham against a decision of the Employment Tribunal sitting in Liverpool on 12th July 1999 which dismissed his claim of unfair constructive dismissal, but made a decision that there had been an unauthorised deduction of wages in the sum of £1,143.35 and ordered the respondents to pay him that sum.

1. In essence, his appeal is by way of an application to introduce new evidence on the issue of what other persons' contractual entitlements were as far as days of holiday entitlement were concerned.
2. In order to introduce new evidence the party seeking to introduce it must show firstly, that the evidence could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence for use at the tribunal. We are prepared to accept that that condition is satisfied. Secondly, he must show not only that it is relevant but that it would probably have an important influence on the result of the case, even though it need not be decisive. Having regard to the issues which arose in this case and, in particular, the question of whether he was constructively dismissed, it seems to us that material, which essentially concerns terms upon which other persons than the appellant were employed, (in one case on a date earlier than the date when the appellant's employment began) whilst of tangential relevance, falls very far short of being evidence which would probably have had an important influence on the result of the case, whether or not it would have been decisive. Therefore, our judgment is that there is no reasonably arguable case that this new evidence should be admitted. That, in essence, is the ground for the appeal. Therefore it follows that there is no reasonably arguable point on appeal to be argued before a full hearing of this tribunal. Therefore we dismiss this appeal at this preliminary stage.