[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Ullah v Celmec Ltd [1997] UKEAT 765_96_1401 (14 January 1997) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1997/765_96_1401.html Cite as: [1997] UKEAT 765_96_1401

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR C WILLIAMS (of Counsel) Messrs Sushma Lal Solicitors 101 Windsor Road Oldham OL8 1RP


 


JUDGE COLIN SMITH QC: We think that there is one arguable point on appeal, and that is the point arising out of the recent decision of Sedley J in Aspden v Webb Poultry [1996] IRLR 521, which appears to us to be relevant here.

It is arguable that there was an implied term in effect that the employers would not dismiss on the grounds of long-term disability or long-term illness in circumstances where the employee may have had a right under the long-term disability insurance scheme. We believe that point which relates to law which has been decided since the tribunal hearing, is a matter that ought to be considered. It is an arguable point, that had such an argument been addressed to the Industrial Tribunal, based on the Aspden case, they might have concluded, despite the apparent attitude of the applicant that the employers should proceed with the internal appeal without a consultant's report, nevertheless we think it just arguable here that the Industrial Tribunal might have held that the dismissal was unreasonable and unfair in the light of the recent decision of Sedley J in the Aspden case. On that basis we will allow this matter to proceed to an appeal.

We do not think that there is anything in the point that notes of evidence are required. The Industrial Tribunal stated that they preferred the evidence of the respondent's witnesses to those of the applicant. We are not going to make any order for any Notes of Evidence.

We do think that you have shown that one arguable point. So you have leave to proceed to a full hearing on that basis.