In the course of a hearing in the Employment Tribunal, it appeared to one party that a member of the tribunal was drunk and fell asleep.
Held: Two questions arose. First whether that tribunal should deal with a complaint about a member of the tribunal, and second whether if impropriety of this sort was established whether a decision could nevertheless stand. The EAT had jurisdiction to hear the complaint even if it had not been so raised, though it was usually desirable that the complaint should be made to the employment tribunal. The EAT might well assume the role of deciders of issues of fact in this respect. A member failing to give his full attention might well give rise to unfairness. That the decision was reserved and then unanimous did not cure this.
Judges:
Peter Gibson LJ, Latham LJ, Sir Martin Nourse
Citations:
[2004] ICR 523, [2003] EWCA Civ 1951, [2004] UKHRR 340, [2003] EWCA Civ 1951, [2004] IRLR 466, [2003] All ER (D) 264
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Preferred – Kudrath v Ministry of Defence EAT 26-Apr-1999
That a matter of complaint against a member of the employment tribunal was not raised before that tribunal but only at the EAT was not held against the applicant. . .
Not followed – Red Bank Manufacturing Co Ltd v Meadows EAT 1992
A party wishing to complain about a member of the employment tribunal should make his complaint to that tribunal rather than at the EAT. The Polkey principle must be considered by the Tribunal in assessing compensation for unfair dismissal even . .
Cited – Whitehart v Raymond Thomson Ltd EAT 11-Sep-1984
A member of the tribunal was said to have dozed off once if not twice during the hearing. Popplewell J said: ‘It is axiomatic that all members of a tribunal must hear all the evidence and to have a trial in which one member of the tribunal is asleep . .
Cited – Whitehart v Raymond Thomson Ltd EAT 11-Sep-1984
A member of the tribunal was said to have dozed off once if not twice during the hearing. Popplewell J said: ‘It is axiomatic that all members of a tribunal must hear all the evidence and to have a trial in which one member of the tribunal is asleep . .
Appeal from – J M Stansbury v Datapulse Plc Troy Holding International Plc EAT 8-May-2003
EAT Practice and Procedure – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Employment
Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.193676
