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

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Affinity Developments Ltd v. Cooper [2000] UKEAT 790_00_2211 (22 November 2000)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/790_00_2211.html
Cite as: [2000] UKEAT 790__2211, [2000] UKEAT 790_00_2211

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


BAILII case number: [2000] UKEAT 790_00_2211
Appeal No. EAT/790/00

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 22 November 2000

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE H WILSON

SIR GAVIN LAIRD CBE

MRS R A VICKERS



AFFINITY DEVELOPMENTS LTD APPELLANT

MR JAMES COOPER RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING – EX PARTE

© Copyright 2000


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellants MR THOMAS de la MARE
    (of Counsel)
    Appearing under the Employment Law Appeal Advice Scheme
       


     

    JUDGE WILSON: This has been the preliminary hearing of the proposed appeal by the respondent company concerning the decision of the Employment Tribunal sitting at Ashford in Kent that it had unfairly dismissed the applicant; that he had suffered a breach of contract and that they had failed to provide him with written reasons for his dismissal.

  1. The facts were shortly stated by the tribunal in its extended reasons. It is quite plain why they found as they did.
  2. Today the respondent is represented by Mr de la Mare through the services of ELAAS. He said at the outset that the company did not dispute the findings on liability. However, he has persuaded us that the matter should go forward for full argument on two points.
  3. The first is whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in not taking for itself the point about the discrepancy over the applicant's rate of pay which was disclosed in the figures in the application by contrast with the appearance.
  4. The second is whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in making an award for unlawful dismissal and then apparently duplicating it in the award which was made for breach of contract.
  5. On those two points only we think the matter should go forward. The case to be listed as Category C, duration one hour.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/790_00_2211.html