Appeal from a decision of an industrial tribunal which decided that Mr. Kumchyk, the employee, had not been unfairly dismissed by Derby City council. He had been directed to work at a particular car park, but had refused. On appeal he now sought to argue a new point, that the order had been unlawful, since the new car park had not been in existence at the time of his contract when had had agreed to work at any on the list.
Held: A point not taken below should not in general be heard by the EAT. This would apply where for example the decision had been a deliberate one made for tactical reasons, but save perhaps in cases where a party had been prevented from arguing the point because of some deception or unfair conduct by the other side. A lack of skill or experience on the part of the appellant or his advocate would not be a sufficient reason.
Arnold J
[1978] UKEAT 122 – 78 – 2407, [1978] ICR 1116
Bailii
Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1974 6(1), Contracts of Employment Act 1972
England and Wales
Employment
Leading Case
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.566244