[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Brown v. Tomlinson & Ors (t/a Tomlinsons Dairies) [2001] UKEAT 0186_01_0405 (4 May 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/0186_01_0405.html Cite as: [2001] UKEAT 186_1_405, [2001] UKEAT 0186_01_0405

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR P GREATOREX (Of Counsel) Instructed by: Richard C Hall & Partners Crown Buildings 121A Saughall Road Blacon Chester CH1 5ET


 


JUDGE WAKEFIELD

1. This is an Ex Parte Preliminary Hearing of the Appeal of Mr P Brown against the decision of an Employment Tribunal sitting at Shrewsbury. By the decision promulgated on 20 December 2000 the majority of the Tribunal dismissed the Applicant's application which had alleged unfair dismissal, health and safety dismissal, sex discrimination, redundancy and constructive unfair dismissal.
2. The Appeal relates only to the question of unfair dismissal whether it be constructive dismissal or dismissal by reason of redundancy. The grounds of appeal are based on the alleged failure of the Employment Tribunal to consider fully either the issue of redundancy or that of constructive unfair dismissal.
3. What the Employment Tribunal in fact found by the majority was:

"that the applicant's contract of employment was terminated by reason of the respondents accepting the employee's repudiation of the contract"

The Employment Tribunal failed, it is asserted, properly to follow through an analysis in terms of redundancy which the decision had started by addressing and had then left unresolved. The Employment Tribunal also, it is said, failed explicitly to consider whether the Appellant had had grounds to behave in the way that he did and which had led the Respondent to accept his repudiation of the contract. They also failed explicitly to consider the question of fairness of the dismissal.

4. We consider that there may be some substance in these criticisms which would amount to errors of law by the Employment Tribunal. The matter will therefore proceed to a full hearing.