[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Robert Fletcher (Greenfield) Ltd v. Blakeman [2001] UKEAT 767_00_1201 (12 January 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/767_00_1201.html Cite as: [2001] UKEAT 767_00_1201, [2001] UKEAT 767__1201

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR J BOWERS QC (Of Counsel) Instructed by Messrs Pannone and Partners Solicitors 123 Deansgate Manchester M3 2BY


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK

1. This Appeal raises new questions of construction in relation to Regulations 3 and 4 of the Redundancy Payment Pensions Regulations 1965. We are satisfied that the grounds of appeal in relation to each of those regulations raises arguable points of law which ought to proceed to a full appeal hearing.
2. Mr Bowers QC has applied for permission to amend his notice of appeal to add an appeal against the Tribunal's review decision promulgated on 6 June 2000. We are not prepared to give permission at this ex parte Preliminary Hearing. A copy of the draft amended notice of appeal should be served on the Respondent forthwith.
3. Following service the Respondent will have 14 days in which to indicate to the Appeal Tribunal marked for my attention whether or not the application is opposed. If it is opposed it will be for the parties to make representations as to whether the matter can be dealt with at a directions hearing before me, on paper by me or at the full appeal hearing.
4. Secondly, Mr Bowers has pointed to paragraphs 6(2)b and 6(3) of the current notice of appeal. The point is taken that the Respondent did not call any evidence nor advance argument in relation to the point decided adverse to the Appellants in relation to regulation 4 of the 1965 Regulations.
5. In these circumstances we direct that a copy of the notice of appeal be sent to the Chairman Mr Russell with a request that he should comment on those particular grounds by reference to his notes of evidence. Copies of those comments will then be made available to the parties.
6. The points raised in this appeal appear to us to be novel certainly at the EAT level. There has been considerable correspondence with the Department of Trade and Industry in connection with this case.
7. In these circumstances we direct that Registrar send a copy of this judgment to the Department inquiring whether or not the Department wishes to be joined as a party to this appeal so that they may make representations on the proper construction of the regulations in question.
8. Finally, so far as the disposal of this appeal is concerned we direct that the matter be listed for half a day subject to any increase in time estimate notified to us by the parties. It will be given Category B. There will be exchange of skeleton arguments between the parties not less than 14 days before the date fixed for full appeal hearing. There are no further directions at this stage.