EAT Practice and Procedure – Appellate jurisdiction/reasons/Burns-Barke
In a 13-page judgment, the Tribunal recorded in an exemplary form its findings of fact, its summary of the law and the submissions of Counsel. In two paragraphs containing its conclusions it failed to give reasons connecting its findings of fact to the statute. The conclusion did not make sense grammatically or legally.
Two points were allowed on appeal applying subsequent judgments of the Employment Appeal Tribunal, making the basis upon which the Tribunal made its findings unsound: O’Hanlon and Tarbuck. But they did not infect other findings. The case was remitted to the same Employment Tribunal to make findings in accordance with the legal directions given by the Employment Appeal Tribunal, and was free to depart from its earlier findings. Conciliation directed.
Judges:
His Honour Judge McMullen QC
Citations:
[2007] UKEAT 0539 – 06 – 0803, UKEAT/0539/06
Links:
Citing:
Cited – O’Hanlon v The Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs EAT 26-Jun-2006
EAT Disability Discrimination – Reasonable adjustments.
The Appellant was disabled within the meaning of the Disability Discrimination Act. The sick pay rules of her employer provided that anyone absent . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251301
