BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Bari v Lesme S & A Ltd (Stewart & Arnold) Ltd [1993] UKEAT 601_90_0607 (6 July 1993) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1993/601_90_0607.html Cite as: [1993] UKEAT 601_90_0607, [1993] UKEAT 601_90_607 |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
At the Tribunal
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KNOX
MR A D SCOTT
MR P TURNER OBE
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
Revised
APPEARANCES
For the Appellant NO APPEARANCE BY OR
ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT
MR JUSTICE KNOX: There is no appearance on this appeal which is an appeal from the Interlocutory Order of the Chairman of the Industrial Tribunal on the 7th September 1990, the Tribunal being London (North), whereby the Originating Application was struck out for want of prosecution and in the alternative, on the basis that it was vexatious and frivolous.
As the Chairman pointed out the history of the application was long drawn out. The employment ended on the 31st May 1985 and the Originating Application was presented on the 29th August 1985. Since then there has been a very long catalogue of delay much, but far from all of which, was due to a postponement of industrial tribunal proceedings by agreement between the parties pending the resolution of criminal proceedings against the Applicant. Those reached the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division in April 1990 when that Court dismissed Mr Bari's appeal against conviction and made a modification of the compensation order that had made below. There then ensued an attempt by Mr Bari to appeal to the House of Lords, which must by now have long since been resolved, one way or the other - we are not told how - but before that was finally disposed of, either by the refusal of leave by the Court of Appeal Criminal Division and the House of Lords or by giving leave for the appeal being dealt with in some way or another, the Chairman of the Industrial Tribunal made the decision which he did make.
The last communication that has been had from, or on behalf of Mr Bari, by this Tribunal, is a letter of the 13th May 1993 in which his wife says:
"We would require some more time to represent the case of appeal with documentary evidence.
. . .
There are other documentary evidences in support of the grounds of appeal and it would take a little more time to sort these in place.
In the interest of justice, we pray that the appeal hearing be adjourned for 6-8 weeks and we should be most grateful."
That was because there was hearing for this appeal to be fixed to come on on the 14th May 1993 and there has been no further response, although Mr or Mrs Bari were invited to indicate dates that they wished to avoid during July 1993. In those circumstances it seems to us that this appeal should be dismissed because of the want of prosecution that has subsisted down to date and accordingly we dismiss it.
