![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Aaroncare Partnership v. Davies [1999] UKEAT 280_99_1506 (15 June 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/280_99_1506.html Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 280_99_1506 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CHARLES
MR L D COWAN
MR D A C LAMBERT
APPELLANT | |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
For the Appellants | NO APPEARANCE OR REPRESENTATION BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS |
MR JUSTICE CHARLES: This case comes before us on a preliminary hearing for the Appellant to argue that he or she has a reasonably arguable case.
"(1) The applicant brought proceedings, specifically a claim of sex discrimination, against the respondent in June 1997 (Mrs T Davies v Arroncare (sic) Partnership 2102994/97).
(2) The case was listed to be heard on 31st October 1997 but settled out of court via ACAS on 29th October 1997.
(3) The applicant's representative was sent the settlement cheque from the respondent on 14th November 1997. The respondent also sent a covering letter and the signed ACAS COT 3 form.
(4) The respondent's covering letter stated, 'we confirm that all residential and nursing homes in the area will be advised of the reason for your client's dismissal from our employment'. This did not form any part of the out of court settlement worded agreement.
(5) The applicant's representative wrote to the respondent on 12th December 1997 asking the respondent, inter alia, which residential / nursing homes had been contacted and what reason had been given for the applicant's dismissal."
"(1) This case has already been settled (copy ACAS Form COT (IT)) herewith.
(2) The applicant is out of time. The Tribunal has not any discretion to extend the time limits.
(3) The applicant is vexatious and calculated to cause disruption to the respondents business of caring for the elderly and sick (copy letter 29.01.98 herewith).
(4) The application is an abuse of the Industrial Tribunal procedure.
(5) The facts of this case are entirely different from Coote v Granada Hospitality Ltd as the applicant's 'representative' is well aware."
"The grounds upon which this appeal is brought are that the Industrial Tribunal erred in law in that:
On the 3rd November 1997 the Applicant signed ACAS Form COT3 (IT) accepting the sum of £500.00 'in full and final settlement ... of all and any claims which she could bring against the Respondent arising from her contract of employment and the termination thereof'.
In such circumstances the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear any further claim by the Applicant in relation to her contract of employment with the appellant.
This lack of jurisdiction was raised with the Tribunal by the appellant and a preliminary hearing requested on this point of law.
The Tribunal refused to hold a preliminary hearing and has thus issued an award based on the hearing that it was not entitled to call."