Appeal No.	EAT/1005/97

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

	At the Tribunal
	On 25 November 1997

Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE B HARGROVE QC
MR J D DALY
MISS S M WILSON

TECHNOLOGY HOUSE GROUP PLC	APPELLANT

MR B ANDREWS	RESPONDENT

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING
Revised

	APPEARANCES

For the Appellant	MR K SENIOR
Representative
Mr R Carver
Technology House Group Plc
Technology House
Ridge Road
Rotherham
S. Yorks S65 1NS	

	JUDGE B HARGROVE QC:  The Appellant claims that the Respondent was not employed by them but by another Company.  No formal appearance was entered by the Respondent and the alleged employers, Datacare Resources Plc, sent two letters which made the claim that the Respondent was an employee of Datacare.

	At the hearing the Appellant did not appear.  It is now sought to put in a number of submissions and documents which, it is said, show that the Respondent was an employee of Datacare.

	With reasonable care, all those matters could have been placed before the Tribunal.  The casual manner in which the Appellants treated the proceedings does not assist them at this stage.  It is trite law that if a party decides to take no part in proceedings at trial and when the decision goes against him claims the decision is in error because there was evidence which they could have produced but elected not to do so, is not to be assisted upon the basis that there must be a trial of all the issues, at first instance, and if a party cares not to be present, not to urge his evidence, and that prevents all the issues being dealt with and such a person is excluded from alleging that the omitted matters, at a later date, on appeal, would have produced a different result.  In our view there is no arguable case here and the appeal fails and is dismissed.