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

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> United Fish Industries (UK) Ltd v. Herbert [2001] UKEAT 226_01_0304 (3 April 2001)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/226_01_0304.html
Cite as: [2001] UKEAT 226_1_304, [2001] UKEAT 226_01_0304

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


BAILII case number: [2001] UKEAT 226_01_0304
Appeal No. EAT/226/01

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 3 April 2001

Before

MR RECORDER LANGSTAFF QC

SIR GAVIN LAIRD CBE

MR P A L PARKER CBE



UNITED FISH INDUSTRIES (UK) LTD APPELLANT

MR MICHAEL PETER HERBERT RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING

© Copyright 2001


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellant MR I TRUSCOTT QC
    (of Counsel)
    Instructed by:
    Messrs Burnside Kemp Fraser
    Solicitors
    48 Queen's Road
    Aberdeen AB15 4YE
       


     

    MR RECORDER LANGSTAFF QC

  1. In this preliminary hearing, from a Decision of the Employment Tribunal sitting at Hull, promulgated on 4 January 2001, we propose to grant permission for the matter to proceed to a full inter-partes hearing, despite our initial reservations that this would be the outcome of this hearing.
  2. We have been persuaded that although it might, on the face of the papers, appear to have been open to the majority to conclude that the employer had not conducted a reasonable investigation to see whether further light might be shed upon the credibility of the two central players, in an incident which took place, and which is referred to at paragraph 4(e), it is not clear, arguably, from the reasoning of the majority, in particular at paragraph 6, precisely what factors were or were not taken into account, and we think that when that is coupled with what may be argued as to what may or may not have been accepted by the Tribunal in paragraph 4(e), that there is a sufficient basis for this matter to merit a full hearing. We say nothing about the merits of the appeal.
  3. The argument will, we think, take no more than half a day. Skeleton Arguments should be provided at least a fortnight beforehand, together with any authorities which it is proposed to rely on.

    Category C, for listing purposes.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/226_01_0304.html