[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Quaker Oats Ltd v Siraj [1998] UKEAT 280_98_2204 (22 April 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1998/280_98_2204.html Cite as: [1998] UKEAT 280_98_2204

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellants	MR P OLDHAM (of Counsel) Ashurst Morris Crisp Solicitors Broadwalk House 5 Appold Street London EC2A 2HA


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK: This appeal raises the question as to the interaction between an employer's disciplinary policy which treats incapacity through alcohol while on duty as an offence normally resulting in summary dismissal, and the same employer's alcohol policy which treats alcohol addiction as an illness to be treated sympathetically with a view to assisting employees to cure themselves, if necessary with outside help.

This employer dismissed its long-standing employee, Mr Siraj, for attending for duty on 7th July 1997 suffering from the effects of alcohol. He had received previous warnings about his drinking. Although dismissal followed these warnings and a disciplinary hearing, at which Mr Siraj did not materially dispute the facts, the tribunal found the dismissal for misconduct to be unfair on the grounds that the employer had not followed its own alcohol policy.

The grounds of appeal are:

(1) that the tribunal failed to apply the well-known Burchell test to the facts of this case;

(2) that the tribunal focused impermissibly on the cause of the misconduct;

(3) that it substituted its own view for that of management; and

(4) that the decision was perverse.

In our view these are matters which ought to be argued at a full appeal hearing. Accordingly, we shall permit the matter to proceed. For that purpose, we give the following directions:

(1) that the appeal should be listed with a time estimate of four hours, Category B.

(2) There should be an exchange of skeleton arguments between the parties and copies lodged with this tribunal not less than 14 days before the date fixed for the full appeal hearing.

Finally, Mr Oldham has drawn our attention to the grounds of appeal set out at paragraph 5(f) and (g) of the Notice of Appeal. We think it important that the parties should, if possible, agree the propositions there set out in order to save the need for Chairman's Notes of Evidence or comments on these grounds of appeal. If within 14 days from the date of this Judgment no agreement has been reached, or if there is disagreement on the propositions there set out or any part of them, then the parties will be at liberty to apply for further directions. That application can be made by letter marked for my attention, and if necessary I shall give directions for Chairman's Notes or comments.