PART TIME WORKERS
An EJ decided that part-time judges of the Residential Property Tribunal had been treated less favourably that their full time comparators (full-time salaried judges of the First-Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) in respect of payment for writing-up decisions in Leasehold Valuation Tribunal cases. He thought they should be paid two-thirds of a daily fee for each day spent sitting in a substantive case. The MoJ appealed against the finding of less favourable treatment, and against the quantification of the sum needed to put right any discrimination, drawing particular attention to the paucity of the evidence. Both Grounds were dismissed, as was a third which argued that the Judge should have changed his determination on reconsideration. However, a cross-appeal by Mr Engel against the reconsideration decision was allowed as to three of the four Grounds argued – the Judge refused to reconsider or ‘clarify’ points on the basis that in each case the matter complained of had not been the subject of argument before him, when it was agreed between the parties on appeal that it had. Mr Engel complained that the Judge lacked impartiality, in particular because he had earlier expressed the view that he, Mr Engel, was ‘milking the system’, and had refused an application for recusal. Although in this latter case the Judge had rejected the application on an inadequate basis, and despite the matters raised by Mr Engel, the matters yet to be determined would nonetheless be remitted to the same Judge for determination: in the circumstances, he could be expected to deal with them fairly despite what had occurred.
Langstaff P J
[2015] UKEAT 0211 – 15 – 2711
Bailii
England and Wales
Employment
Updated: 07 January 2022; Ref: scu.556434