BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



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

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Strachan v Stoneridge Electronics Ltd [2004] UKEAT 0054_03_2705 (27 May 2004)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2004/0054_03_2705.html
Cite as: [2004] UKEAT 54_3_2705, [2004] UKEAT 0054_03_2705

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

BAILII case number: [2004] UKEAT 0054_03_2705
Appeal No. EATS/0054/03

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
52 MELVILLE STREET, EDINBURGH EH3 7HF
             At the Tribunal
             On 27 May 2004

Before

THE HONOURABLE LORD JOHNSTON

DR A H BRIDGE

MR M G SMITH


PAUL STRACHAN APPELLANT

STONERIDGE ELECTRONICS LTD RESPONDENT

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

© Copyright 2004

    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellant Mr Paul Strachan, In Person
    34 Reform Street
    TAYPORT
    DD6 9HX




    For the Respondents



    Mr E McHugh, Solicitor
    Of-
    Messrs Dundas & Wilson
    Solicitors
    191 West George Street
    GLASGOW G2 2LD

    SUMMARY

    UNFAIR DISMISSAL

    Reassessment of compensation for unfair dismissal


     

    LORD JOHNSTON:

  1. This appeal arises from a previous decision of this Tribunal which allowed the appeal to the limited extent of seeking clarification from the Employment Tribunal on four aspects of compensation, namely, overtime, drawings from the appellant's business, post-cessation of the employment with the respondents, and pension rights.

  2. In this respect, we merely refer to the Note submitted by the Chairman of the Employment Tribunal, consequent upon the decision of this Tribunal.

  3. We are content to adopt the reasoning in respect of that Note with one exception, namely, that there is an arithmetical error in terms of the loss of pension rights which should have run from February rather than May giving a total of thirteen months instead of ten. To that extent, this appeal is allowed.

  4. In the circumstances the monetary award will therefore be increased by the sum of £450.

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2004/0054_03_2705.html