The claimant had sought damages alleging unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions from his wages. The defendant argued that it was not subject to the jurisdiction of the court. During preliminary discussions, the judge hearing the application was said to have made remarks indicating a bias against the defendant (now appellant).
Held: The Tribunal had given the appearance of bias. This appeared from notes made by counsel appearing on behalf of the disappointed litigant, indicating that the Chairman of the Tribunal had in mind that the Respondents, whom counsel represented, were well known to the Tribunal and then went on to describe them in derogatory terms. The facts demonstrated that the Tribunal was taking into account matters which were not based upon the merits of the particular case but rather based upon entirely extraneous circumstances, and on a view of one of the litigants which had nothing to do with the particular matter then before the Tribunal.
Judges:
Pill, Mantell, McKinnon LJJ
Citations:
[2001] EWCA Civ 599
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Turner v Harada Ltd (T/A Chequepoint UK) EAT 23-Mar-1999
Appeal by Mr Turner against an Employment Tribunal’s order that his case on the merits be not heard until after the Employment Appeal Tribunal has heard and determined an appeal by his former employers, which they wish to make against a previous . .
See Also – Harada Ltd (T/A Chequepoint UK Ltd) v Turner EAT 15-Jul-1999
Appeal against finding that defendant was subject to the jurisdiction of the court. . .
See Also – Harada Ltd T/A Chequepoint UK Ltd v Turner EAT 2-Nov-1999
EAT Jurisdiction – . .
Cited by:
Cited – A v B EAT 23-Jan-2002
The claimant appealed against the decision of the tribunal on the basis that in its remarks it had shown bias. The tribunal had read the papers which would stand as evidence in chief, and then expressed a view, and given a costs warning. The . .
See Also – Harada Ltd (T/A Chequepoint Uk) v Turner EAT 25-Feb-2003
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal. . .
See Also – Harada Ltd (T/A Chequepoint UK) v Turner EAT 17-Mar-2003
. .
See Also – Harada Limited (T/A Chequepoint) v Turner CA 2-Dec-2003
Applications for leave to appeal. The claimant had alleged unfair dismissal. The respondent denied jurisdiction. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200974