Deman v Victoria University of Manchester: EAT 28 Sep 1998

The claimant asserted the appearance of prejudice in the tribunal which had heard his claim.
Held: The claim was unfounded. Courts should acknowledge that there was always a risk of causing suspicion if untoward remarks were made, and a court should be careful. Nevertheless, the appeal was dismissed.
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal.

Judges:

His Honour Judge Peter Clark

Citations:

EAT/1375/98

Links:

EAT

Statutes:

Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 1993 13(2)(d)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedTchoula v Netto Foodstores Ltd EAT 6-Mar-1998
A bald statement saying that X’s evidence was preferred to Y’s is implausible and unreasoned and unacceptable; included simply to try and prevent any appeal. It is likely that there will be a great deal of background material which is . .

Cited by:

See AlsoDeman v Victoria University of Manchester EAT 28-Sep-1999
. .
See AlsoLeavers v The Victoria University of Manchester EAT 21-Feb-2000
EAT Sex Discrimination – Direct
EAT Sex Discrimination – Direct . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.171622