[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Giraud UK Ltd v. Smith [2000] UKEAT 1105_99_1201 (12 January 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/1105_99_1201.html Cite as: [2000] UKEAT 1105_99_1201

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellants	MR J STILES (of Counsel) Legal Personnel & Management Services Merchants House 1-7 Leeds Road Windhill Bridge Shipley West Yorkshire BD18 1BP


 


MR JUSTICE CHARLES: The parties to this appeal are a company called Giraud UK Ltd and a Mr S.Smith. The appeal comes before us today by way of Preliminary Hearing.

1. The appeal is against the decision of an Employment Tribunal sitting at Leicester. The Extended Reasons were sent to the parties on 23 July 1999. The decision of that Tribunal which is the subject matter of the appeal is paragraph (b) of the decision to the effect that the Respondent company made an unlawful deduction from the Applicant's wages.
2. As we understand it, the basis of that decision is the conclusion of the Employment Tribunal that a clause in the contract, which is set out in paragraph 9 of the Extended Reasons, was a penalty and one can see that that was the reasoning of the Tribunal from paragraph 13 of the Extended Reasons.
3. We have before us an amended Notice of Appeal which sets out the grounds upon which this appeal is brought in paragraph 6. One can see that the main point on the appeal is the following and it is paragraph 6 (i):

"(i) The Employment Tribunal erred in law in holding that the notice provision in the Respondent's Contract of Employment amounted to a penalty clause."

The other sub-paragraphs, as we read them, are mainly supportive of that main point.

4. In our judgment that Notice of Appeal raises points of law that are reasonably arguable under the umbrella heading "Whether or not the clause amounted to a penalty". It is inappropriate for us to give any views as to the strength of those arguments over and above our conclusion that reasonably arguable points of law are raised.
5. We will give this case Category B and a time estimate of half a day.