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 appellant argued that they had gone over the line.
Held: Langstaff QC said: ‘taken at the highest, the remarks were a strong indication of the way the Tribunal’s mind was moving. But we note that repeatedly there are indications that the Tribunal’s mind was not closed, in the sense of finally made up, and we do not think that any court could see the line drawn in such position.’ No concluded view had been expressed. The appeal was dismissed.
Judges:
Langstaff QC
Citations:
[2002] UKEAT 0763 – 01 – 2301
Links:
Citing:
Cited – Harada Ltd v Turner CA 6-Apr-2001
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.202386