The claimant had begun proceedings alleging race discrimination by the respondent in the conduct of recruitment. The Council had replied requesting that the claim be struck out as frvolous and vexatious. The tribunal had rejected that request and refused to order a deposit, though it did say that his claim was unlikely to succeed.
Held: ‘Mr Lawal, dissatisfied by meeting with total success, asked for extended reasons, perhaps with a view to an appeal’ and ‘it is only points of law with which we are concerned, referable to that decision emerges from the Notice of Appeal. Mr Lawal was entirely victorious on that occasion. The Employment Tribunal’s view on that day that his IT1 had no prospect of success was not a determination of that issue but just a necessary stage in the application under Rule 7(4) if the application was to be fully considered. ‘ Application for leave to appeal rejected.
Judges:
Lidsay J P
Citations:
[2001] UKEAT 910 – 00 – 2601
Links:
Cited by:
Appeal from – Lawal v Chesterfield Borough Council EAT 9-May-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.203408