[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Polygon Corporation v. Tregunna [2001] UKEAT 1194_00_2102 (21 February 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/1194_00_2102.html Cite as: [2001] UKEAT 1194__2102, [2001] UKEAT 1194_00_2102

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR N BOOTH (of Counsel) Appearing under the Employment Law Appeal Advice Scheme


 


MR COMMISSIONER HOWELL QC:

1. Mr Booth, we have been persuaded that the points you helpfully argued before us today on behalf of the Appellants Polygon Corporation under the ELAAS scheme do give rise to arguable points of law which we should direct to go forward for a full hearing of the Employment Appeal Tribunal. We would ask for your assistance if you would before you relinquish the matter in assisting Mr Hall to reformulate the Notice of Appeal so as to identify the points that you have argued before us today rather than some of the other points that he originally raised, which you have not argued and do not appear to us to give separately arguable grounds of appeal. For present purposes we simply say that we are satisfied that there is an arguable issue of law whether the Tribunal misdirected themselves, and/or reached a conclusion not open to them as a reasonable Tribunal, in determining not to admit the Respondent's Notice of Appearance and documentary and other evidence out of time for the reasons stated by the Tribunal in paragraph 2 of their Extended Reasons dated 1 August at page 31 of the bundle, without addressing the merits of the Respondent's case and the other factors relevant to the proper exercise of their discretion, identified in particular in the judgment of Mr Justice Murray as he then was in Kwik Save v Swain [1997] ICR 49.
2. We give the Appellant (Polygon) leave to lodge an amended Notice of Appeal based on those issues, within 14 days of today. We make it clear that as Mr Booth is acting under the ELAAS scheme, although he will very helpfully give voluntary assistance to Mr Hall in the reformulation of that, it is the responsibility of Mr Hall and the Appellant formally to lodge the amended document with the Employment Appeal Tribunal Office within the 14 days.
3. We will therefore direct that the case should go forward to a full hearing for the EAT on that issue, listing Category C. Estimated length of hearing should be half a day. We direct that skeleton arguments should be exchanged within the parties and lodged with the EAT Office not later than 14 days before the dated fixed for the full hearing. We do not consider that it will be necessary to give any directions requesting the Chairman's notes of evidence.