 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Abrahams v Crown Prosecution Service [1993] UKEAT 829_92_0903 (9 March 1993) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1993/829_92_0903.html Cite as: [1993] UKEAT 829_92_903, [1993] UKEAT 829_92_0903 |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
At the Tribunal
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE WOOD MC (P)
MR A C BLYGHTON
MISS A P VALE
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
Revised
APPEARANCES
For the Appellant MR J ABRAHAMS
(Appellant in Person)
For the Respondents MR D TRINCHERO
Solicitor
Treasury Solicitors
28 Broadway
LONDON SW1H 9JS
MR JUSTICE WOOD (PRESIDENT): This is an appeal by Mr Abrahams from an interlocutory decision of a learned Chairman sitting in London (North) whereby he rejected an interlocutory application for Further and Better Particulars. That is no longer relevant for us because of documents that have been produced. Secondly, he rejected a request for Inspection of Documents because it was couched as a request for information, it was also a matter of evidence.
Mr Abrahams argued before us today that the learned Chairman was wrong in the way he exercised his discretion because it was necessary in proceedings such as the present, for the fair disposal, that all the documentation should be produced. The documentation is listed at pages 11 and 12 of the Bundle before us and it is a list to which only part of the numbered paragraphs are now applicable. Those paragraphs are 9, 10, 15, 18, 19 and 20. Eighteen, 19 and 20 are clearly requests for information. Ten is for a detailed explanation and 9 is for a list of all short-listed candidates. Those do not refer to existing documentation by way of discovery, the only paragraph that could possibly be relevant today, as we understand the issues, is paragraph 15 that is the full employment file on the Applicant himself.
We have been shown a letter of today from the Treasury Solicitor which has answered, and indeed given, information substantially as requested in those long, long, list of documents and it seems to us that the learned Chairman did not err in the decision which he reached. Mr Abrahams I hope will accept from us that the decision does not prevent him from seeing any relevant documentation during the hearing, if the learned Chairman feels during the hearing that those documents ought to be disclosed. He is merely deciding, in the exercise of his discretion at this stage, that he is not prepared to make the Order but that it does not mean that for ever and a day none of that documentation is going to be relevant. He wishes to wait and see, and in so doing in our judgment, he was entirely justified.
This appeal therefore, Mr Abrahams, will have to be dismissed we can not help you at this stage.