![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Fishwick v. Mitie Cleaning North Ltd [2001] UKEAT 248_01_0108 (1 August 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/248_01_0108.html Cite as: [2001] UKEAT 248_1_108, [2001] UKEAT 248_01_0108 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE LINDSAY (PRESIDENT)
MS J DRAKE
MR T C THOMAS CBE
APPELLANT | |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
For the Appellant | Mrs J Fishwick Mother |
MR JUSTICE LINDSAY (PRESIDENT)
"The unanimous decision of the Tribunal is that the applicant's claims for unfair dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages are hereby dismissed."
"we find that the applicant was paid any shortfall in the following week, number 44. There have been no deductions from the applicant's wages."
And a little later:
"The respondent [Mitie] committed no fundamental breach of contract entitling the applicant to resign in response thereto. There was a change in the applicant's terms and conditions of employment when in November 1999 her hours were reduced on two weeks' notice. That was a fundamental breach of contract but the applicant acquiesced in that breach. She worked without protest until she resigned on 10 January 2000."
And a little later still:
"In all the circumstances we find that the respondent was not guilty of any fundamental breach of contract and the applicant was not dismissed."
"Please see attached sheet and statement - showing new evidence not previously considered by the Tribunal - as grounds of this appeal."
It was, no doubt, pointed out to Miss Fishwick, perhaps by the Employment Appeal Tribunal, perhaps otherwise - one way or another it was drawn to her attention that an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal required there to be Extended Reasons and accordingly on 29 December she asked the Employment Tribunal to give Extended Reasons. On 9 January of this year, the request for Extended Reasons was refused. The Employment Tribunal wrote to say:
"Thank you for your letter dated 29 December 2000. The Chairman of the Employment Tribunals, to whom the letter has been referred, has refused your request for extended reasons as it is made well out of time. The Chairman, Mrs Porter, notes that there may be an application for review: it has not yet been received."
"In exercise of the power conferred upon me by Rule 11(5) of the Rules of Procedure set out in Schedule 1 to the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 I refuse the application for a review by the applicant contained in her letter dated 16 January 2001 on the grounds that it has no reasonable prospect of success."
And in paragraph 4 of the Reasons it says:
"4. I cannot find that the interests of justice require such a review and I find that there are no other grounds under Rule 11 to justify such a review.
5. In any event the application should have been made within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties and it was not so made.
6. There must be finality in litigation."