An industrial tribunal hearing conducted behind the locked doors of the chairman’s office was not held in public, even if, in fact, no member of the public was prevented from attending. The obligation to sit in public was fundamental, and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to conduct itself in this way. The industrial tribunal system … Continue reading Storer v British Gas plc: CA 25 Feb 2000
The claimant had been ordered to pay a deposit as a condition of being allowed to proceed with the claim which the tribunal had judged to have no reasonable prospect of success. The claim was struck out after the tribunal had been wrongly told that the deposits had not been paid. The strike out was … Continue reading Immigration Advisory Services v Oommen: EAT 19 Mar 1997
Preliminary appeal against order for payment by claimant of respondent’s costs of the hearing before the Emloyment Tribunal. Held: The appeal could go ahead. Judges: Charles J Citations: [1999] UKEAT 220 – 99 – 0207 Links: Bailii Statutes: Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: See Also … Continue reading Ghosh v London Borough of Tower Hamlets: EAT 2 Jul 1999
The appellant wished to pursue an appeal against the striking out of his claim, and objected that contrary to the Rules, a member of the board who had heard the pre-hearing review had also sat on the full hearing. Held: The appeal should be allowed to go ahead. Judges: Charles J Citations: [1999] UKEAT 1170 … Continue reading Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd: EAT 15 Feb 1999
The applicant objected that one of the lay members of the Appeal Tribunal had, on other occasions, sat with a recorder who, as counsel, was appearing for a party in that appeal. Held: There was no real possibility of bias from this scenario. The tribunal had to be independent and impartial, but mere generalised allegations … Continue reading Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd: EAT 6 Oct 1999
The claimant had had mixed success in claims for race discrimination, but appealed orders to pay to the costs of the respondents. She claimed to be impecunious and that that should have been taken into account before deciding whether a costs order should be made against her. Should a costs sanction be available to restrain … Continue reading Dr I Kovacs v Queen Mary and Westfield College and Another: CA 22 Mar 2002
A tribunal had erred in ordering that names of both complainant and respondent and of witnesses should be protected in a sexual harassment case. The power only exists in respect of the complainant and a ‘person affected’. This group should not be extended. The imposition of general reporting restrictions on a sex discrimination case went … Continue reading Regina v London (North) Industrial Tribunal Ex Parte Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 13 May 1998
The claimant had brought and lost an action relating to his dismissal by the defendant, who now appealed against an order that he was not estopped from bring a second claim on a different basis namely race discrimination, disapplying the rule in Henderson. Held: The Council’s appeal succeeded. The rule in Henderson should have been … Continue reading Divine-Bortey v London Borough of Brent: CA 14 May 1998
It is within the power of an industrial tribunal to regulate its own procedure by ordering simultaneous exchange of witness statements. Citations: Times 12-Nov-1997 Statutes: Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 (1993 No 2687) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.80379
The claimant had been summarily dismissed. His application at first made no mention of a complaint that it had related to his trades union activities. He wrote to the secretary seeking amendment of his claim to include a claim that his dismissal was automatically unfair by reason of those activities. By this time the three … Continue reading Selkent Bus Co Ltd v Moore: EAT 2 May 1996
The claimant having failed in his claim for unfair dismissal, wanted to claim against the tribunal and appeal tribunal alleging a conspiracy against him. The hearing had been heard in private to which he had objected. He wanted to go straight to the . .
The claimant had been struck from the register of nurses after convictions arising from failures of his staff at his nursing home with regard to drug management. He had then brought claims of unlawful race discrimination against the health authority and against the respondent. Those claims had been dismissed as frivolous, no valid comparator having … Continue reading Balamoody v United Kingdom Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting: CA 6 Dec 2001
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
