United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

BAILII case number: [1995] UKEAT 1067_94_0504

Appeal No. EAT/1067/94

EMPOLYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL

58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

At the Tribunal

On 5th April 1995

Before

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MUMMERY (P)

MS S R CORBY

MR K M YOUNG CBE

---

TOPSIDE GROUP LTD          APPELLANTS

(1) MR G HOLMES

(2) TOPSIDE ALUMINIUM SYSTEMS (IN LIQUIDATION)          RESPONDENTS

---

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

Revised


 


---

APPEARANCES

For the Appellants MR M O'NEIL

(of Counsel)

Messrs Newbys

45 Albert Road

Middlesborough

Cleveland

TS2 1PT

For the 1st Respondent MR P CAPE

(of Counsel)

David Gray & Company

Old County Court

56 Westgate Road

Newcastle Upon Tyne

For the 2nd Respondent NO APPEARANCE BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE 2ND           RESPONDENTS


 


MR JUSTICE MUMMERY (PRESIDENT): We find ourselves in this Appeal in an unusual predicament. It is this. First, we do not think that this Appeal should be allowed today. Secondly, we do not think that this Appeal should be dismissed today. The view we have formed is that, before deciding whether to allow the Appeal or dismiss it, we need more information. Some of this information should have been provided to us already, but it has not. What we propose to do is to adjourn the Appeal to be heard in May, on terms that, within a specified period, affidavits be lodged with the Tribunal on behalf of Topside Group, dealing with the following matters.

First, as to the state of knowledge of the Directors, officers or employees of Group as to the claims and proceedings brought by the first Respondent, Mr Holmes for unfair dismissal.

Secondly, as to the communications and dealings that have taken place since the appointment of the liquidator on 31st March 1994 with the officers, directors and employees of Group.

Thirdly, as to the affairs of Topside Aluminium Systems on which we would expect an affidavit from the liquidator, exhibiting any accounts, statement of affairs or other documents relating to the assets and liabilities of Aluminium.

We also wish to have from the liquidator an explanation or account of his knowledge of the proceedings brought by Mr Holmes against Topside Aluminium Systems as to the letter which was sent to Aluminium at the same address as occupied by Group, and an explanation by him as to why no action was taken to put in a IT3 Notice of Appearance on behalf of Topside Aluminium.

We would also want details to be given in an affidavit on behalf of Group, as to who were the directors of Group, and who were the directors of Aluminium at the time when the proceedings were brought by Mr Holmes, and at the time in August and September when the correspondence took place between the Industrial Tribunal and Group.

We would expect this evidence to be available by the end of this month, Friday, 28th April 1995. The date fixed for the resumed hearing of this Appeal will be sometime in May.