Appeal No. EATS/0075/03

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
52 MELVILLE STREET, EDINBURGH EH3 7HF

	At the Tribunal
	On 11 March 2004

 
Before
THE HONOURABLE LORD JOHNSTON
MR A G McQUAKER
MR M G SMITH

 

SULEYMAN KIRIK	APELLANT

 

 
OKTAY LTD	RESPONDENT

 
 
Transcript of Proceedings
 
JUDGMENT

 

 

 

 

	APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	Mr F Lefevre, Solicitor
Of-
Quantum Claims
Employment Division
70 Carden Place
Queens Cross
ABERDEEN   AB10 1UP

 

For the Respondents

 

 

 

Mr N Ramsay, Solicitor
Of-
Messrs Anderson Shaw & Gilbert
Solicitors
20 Church Street
INVERNESS   IV1 1ED

 

LORD JOHNSTON:
 
1.	This is an appeal from a decision of the Employment Tribunal sitting in Inverness following upon this Tribunal remitting the matter back for consideration of compensation against a finding of unfair dismissal.
 
2.	Mr Lefevre, for the appellant employee, submitted that the approach of the Tribunal was perverse inasmuch that they had restricted any award of compensation to two weeks’ pay to reflect the period which the Tribunal assessed, obviously as a speculation over which discussions about wage cuts might have taken place before the appellant rejected any such suggestion on that hypothesis.
 
3.	We do not consider the Tribunal’s approach can be regarded as so flawed as to be categorised as perverse.  It seems to us that the approach adopted by the Tribunal was one they were entitled to take against the background of the financial chaos of the business, and, the arrival of a further employee by reason of the departure of the manager temporarily to Turkey, was nothing to the point.  Whatever else the Tribunal might have done, we consider what they did do was at least a permissible option and we will not interfere.  This appeal is therefore dismissed.