Appeal No.	 EAT/796/01

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

	At the Tribunal
	On 18 January 2002

Before
MR RECORDER LANGSTAFF QC
MR P R A JACQUES CBE
MR T C THOMAS CBE

MS RACHEL SMART	APPELLANT

JOHN McASLAN & PARTNERS LTD	RESPONDENTS

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING 

Revised

	APPEARANCES

For the Appellant	The Appellant in person	

MR RECORDER LANGSTAFF QC

1	This case comes to us by way of preliminary hearing from the Employment Tribunal at London (Central).  We have decided that so far as the Decision dismissed the complaint by the Appellant that she had had wages unlawfully deducted, there is a point which merits the consideration of a full Tribunal.  

2	We think there may well be force in her point that her claim was brought within three months of the appropriate date.  The case raises the issue of the time limit under the Employment Rights Act 1996 section 23, and we think it is a short but important point which should take no more than one hour to argue.  

3	We direct that the Skeleton Arguments of both parties be provided to this Tribunal no less than seven days prior to the hearing, together with photocopies of any of the authorities which the parties propose to rely upon, other than the statute itself.  

4	Since we are giving permission to proceed to a hearing at which the Respondents will be represented, it is not appropriate that we should, at this stage say any more, save that we do not think that there is any similar point to be made in respect of the contract claim, if it is, in truth, distinct from the deduction of wages claim.  Ms Smart, as we understand it, does not press this part of her claim and therefore, perhaps, it is unnecessary to say any more about it at this stage.