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

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Durrant v. Financial Collection Agency Ltd [2001] UKEAT 1325_00_1209 (12 September 2001)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/1325_00_1209.html
Cite as: [2001] UKEAT 1325_00_1209, [2001] UKEAT 1325__1209

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


BAILII case number: [2001] UKEAT 1325_00_1209
Appeal No. EAT/1325/00

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 12 September 2001

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE D SEROTA QC

MR P DAWSON OBE

MR I EZEKIEL



MR N DURRANT APPELLANT

FINANCIAL COLLECTION AGENCY LTD RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING EX PARTE

© Copyright 2001


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellant MRS ELIZABETH ANDREW
    (of Counsel)
    Appearing under the
    Employment Law Appeal
    Advice Scheme
       


     

    HIS HONOUR JUDGE SEROTA QC

  1. This appeal relates to a claim made by Mr Neil Durrant against his former employers, Financial Collection Agency Ltd.
  2. Mr Durrant began his employment with the Respondent on
    14 January 1999. His employment was terminated in December 1999. As he had not been employed for a 12 month period he had no remedy by way of a claim for unfair dismissal. However, his contract, as the Employment Tribunal found, contained provisions dealing with grievance procedure. That grievance procedure required various steps to be taken by the employer before a dismissal could be made on the basis that the Appellant had not achieved the required standard. The dismissal on notice of Mr Durrant was made without the employer having complied with the disciplinary grievance rules and procedure.
  3. The Employment Tribunal considered that as Mr Durrant was a senior employee it was reasonable for the employers to deal with his dismissal without reference to the disciplinary grievance rules and procedure.
  4. It is unnecessary and inappropriate for us to go into any detail as to the merits of the appeal. Suffice it to say that in our view there is a fairly arguable case that the Tribunal was in error in failing to find that there had been a breach of contract by the employer in failing to comply with the grievance procedure and in failing to consider what financial consequences, as a matter of law of contract, flowed from that breach of contract.
  5. In those circumstances, it seems to us, that we should allow this appeal to go forward and we do so. In our opinion and subject to anything that might be said by Mrs Andrew the case should be listed as Category C. We think it will not last more than 2 hours. We will order that skeleton arguments be lodged by both Appellant and Respondent at least 14 days before the date of hearing accompanied by copies of any authorities referred to in the skeleton arguments or upon which either party wishes to rely.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/1325_00_1209.html