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

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Armstrong & Anor v. Honourable Company of Master Mariners [2001] UKEAT 700_01_1810 (18 October 2001)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/700_01_1810.html
Cite as: [2001] UKEAT 700_1_1810, [2001] UKEAT 700_01_1810

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

BAILII case number: [2001] UKEAT 700_01_1810
Appeal No. EAT/700/01

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 18 October 2001

Before

THE HONOURABLE LORD JOHNSTON

MR R N STRAKER

MR B ARMSTRONG


MR B ARMSTRONG
(2) MRS J ARMSTRONG		 APPELLANT

THE HONOURABLE COMPANY OF MASTER MARINERS RESPONDENT

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING

© Copyright 2001

    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellants MS ANN CUTTING
    (Solicitor)
    (Employment)
    25 Elm Grove
    London SE15 5DB
       


     

    LORD JOHNSTON:

  1. This is a preliminary hearing in relation to an appeal by two Applicants from a decision of the Employment Tribunal sitting in London Central, regarding applications for unfair dismissal in respect of both Applicants, which applications were successful. However, the Tribunal also found that the First Applicant had contributed to his dismissal and, further, that there were certain factors which reduced the level of compensation, particularly by reference to the issues of obtaining further employment and, indeed, the whole question of to what extent there were mitigating factors.

  2. Ms Cutting, who appeared this morning on behalf of both Appellants, made a number of points but fundamentally pointed to the fact that the Tribunal had determined the issue of compensation with regard to mitigating factors without hearing any evidence on the matter or, indeed, inviting evidence, nor apparently even inviting the employer upon whom the onus of establishing mitigation in material factors, even to make any submissions.

  3. We are also satisfied that the assessment of the level of contribution which depends upon one sentence in paragraph 17 of the Decision is wholly inappropriate.

  4. It will have to be determined in due course, assuming this appeal succeeds (which is not a question) whether or not the matter should be determined by another Tribunal or by the same Tribunal and we simply raise that at this stage.

  5. As far as we are concerned at this stage of the matter this appeal raises at least two important issues to try and we will order a full hearing.

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/700_01_1810.html