If you found BAILII useful today, would you consider making a contribution?
Your donation will help us maintain and extend our databases of legal information. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month donates, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CHARLES
MR J R CROSBY
MR R THOMSON
APPELLANT | |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
For the Appellant | MISS N KHALIQUE Instructed by Messrs Paris & Co Solicitors The Marble Lodge Cocksparrow Street Warwick CV34 4ED |
MR JUSTICE CHARLES
"In the case before us the purpose and effect are really the same."
to found submissions that is was reasonably arguable that the Employment Tribunal had not directed themselves properly to the distinction between purpose and effect were submissions that were going to fail because, it seemed to us at that stage that you could read between the lines in paragraph 16 and reach a conclusion that what the Employment Tribunal were actually finding was that the employers were not genuinely seeking to investigate the manner in which witness statements had been obtained and the participation that the three Applicants had taken in the investigation.