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 £1, 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 >> British Airways v. Moore & Anor [1999] UKEAT 185_99_1504 (15 April 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/185_99_1504.html Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 185_99_1504 |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER CLARK
MR E HAMMOND OBE
MISS D WHITTINGHAM
| APPELLANT | |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
PRELIMINARY HEARING
Revised
| For the Appellant | MR J BOWERS QC instructed by JOANNA PAWLEY Solicitor British Airways Plc Wareside (HBA3) PO Box 365 Harmendsworth UB7 OGB |
| For the Respondent |
HIS HONOUR JUDGE CLARK: This appeal raises important issues, affecting many thousand of airline employees, arising out of the Appellant's policy of grounding pregnant cabin crew after 16 weeks of pregnancy, resulting in their temporary transfer to alternative work on the ground with loss of certain flight allowances.
These complaints, by two female cabin crew members, succeeded in part. Against those findings this appeal is brought.
Having considered the grounds of appeal, settled by Mr John Bowers QC, his written skeleton argument and oral submissions before us today, we are satisfied that the appeal as presently constituted should proceed to a full appeal hearing. In these circumstances, we need say no more about the prospective merits of the appeal.
We see that the Respondents wish to enter a cross-appeal and we think in all the circumstances that this case should be listed for one and a half days, Category A. For the purposes of the full hearing, skeleton arguments should be lodged by both parties not less than 14 days before the date fixed for the full appeal hearing. Copies of those skeleton arguments to be lodged with this Tribunal at the same time.
The Respondent's solicitors, by letter dated 18 March 1999 to the Registrar, have raised the question of interest on the eventual awards in the event that the Tribunal findings on liability are sustained on appeal. It appears that the Chairman has adjourned the question of remedies until after the outcome of the present appeal is known. We have considerable sympathy with the Respondents who, if at the end of the day succeed in securing an award of compensation, will to some extent have the interest on those payment put back. Having raised this matter with Mr Bowers, we feel unable to give any directions ourselves but the parties may wish to consider the possibility of agreement as to the date on which interest starts to run. What we can do is to direct that this appeal should be listed for hearing with all reasonable expedition and that should be borne in mind by those responsible for listing
