Appeal No.	EAT/1459/98

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

	At the Tribunal
	On 21 January 1999

Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE H WILSON
MR R SANDERSON OBE
MRS R A VICKERS

DR D P AIKMAN	APPELLANT

BIOTECHNOLOGY BIOLOGICAL	RESPONDENTS
SCIENCES RESEARCH COUNCIL

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

Revised

	APPEARANCES

For the Appellant	DR D P AIKMAN
(In Person)	
For the Respondents	MR D FISHER
(Of Counsel)
Messrs Tovell & Co
Solicitors
55 Dukes Avenue
London W4 2AG	

	JUDGE H WILSON:	This is an appeal by Dr Aikman against the decision on on his Application for Review made to the Tribunal.   We have had the benefit of a lengthy written application to this Tribunal and we also have the full reasons which were promulgated by the Employment Tribunal on 18 September 1998.

	We began by discussing with Dr Aikman, who appears on his own behalf, the contents of paragraph 3.1 of that decision, wherein the legal position on review is summarised and, in particular, asked whether Dr Aikman agreed that the two parts of Rule 11 which were applicable were the ones dealing with new evidence and the interests of justice.   He agreed that that was accurate.

	We have therefore considered the decision reached by the Tribunal in the light of those two parts of the Rule and in the context of Dr Aikman’s application and his submissions today.

	We find that the statement of the law about new evidence and interests of justice was accurately and properly stated by the Chairman and that nothing else is relevant.   We also find, at the end of the submissions, that nothing that has been written or said leads us to consider that the decision was flawed.   Nothing that Dr Aikman has submitted persuades us that the tests which had to be applied by the Tribunal were not properly and fully applied and there is, therefore, no ground upon which we can disturb the decision and his appeal against the review decision is dismissed.