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 >> Blackwood v Phillips & Anor [1998] UKEAT 1135_97_2404 (24 April 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1998/1135_97_2404.html Cite as: [1998] UKEAT 1135_97_2404 |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER CLARK
MR D CHADWICK
MR P R A JACQUES CBE
| APPELLANT | |
(2) LONDON BOROUGH OF LAMBETH |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
| For the Appellant | MS C REID (of Counsel) Messrs Usman & Co Solicitors 6A Blenheim Grove Rye Lane Peckham London SE15 4QL |
JUDGE PETER CLARK: This appeal came on for a preliminary hearing before us today. Ms Reid, on behalf of the Appellant, made it clear that the appeal against the Industrial Tribunal's finding that there was no sex discrimination in this case was not pursued. However, the remaining two grounds of appeal are pursued.
As to the third ground of appeal, which appears in the Notice of Appeal as a complaint that the Industrial Tribunal failed to admit crucial evidence, further and better particulars of that ground have been provided in the following terms:
"The Appellant requested at the hearing to put in for the guidance of the Tribunal, copies of the guidelines relating to:
(i) Long Term Ill Health (ii) Frequent Absence Procedure, which were crucial to her case. This request was rejected. In consequence the Appellant considers that the Tribunal failed to consider those relevant procedures in their determination."
Ms Reid has sought to explain to us precisely which documents were before the Industrial Tribunal and which documents it is said were not and in respect of which an application was refused.
We have no comments by the Industrial Tribunal, nor indeed the Respondent in relation to the further and better particulars of the third ground of appeal. In those circumstances we give the following direction.
First, the Appellant shall lodge with this Appeal Tribunal within 14 days of today, an affidavit or affirmation which sets out in detail the nature of her case under ground 3 of the grounds of appeal, exhibiting where necessary the documents to which she refers.
A copy of that affidavit will then be sent by this Tribunal to the Respondent for comment, if necessary by lodging an affidavit sworn on behalf of the Respondent within 14 days of receipt of a copy of the Appellant's affidavit.
Both the Appellant's and the Respondents' copy affidavits will then be sent to the Industrial Tribunal Chairman, Mrs Mason for her comments. When that process is complete both affidavits and the Chairman's comments will be returned to me for further directions for the disposal of this appeal.
