United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

BAILII case number: [1995] UKEAT 1234_94_1005

Appeal No. EAT/1234/94

EMPOLYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL

58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

At the Tribunal

On 10 May 1995

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MUMMERY (P)

MISS J W COLLERSON

MR D J JENKINS MBE

---

MR Z          APPELLANT

SPECIAL HOSPITALS SERVICE AUTHORITY (ASHWORTH HOSPITAL)          RESPONDENTS

---

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING

Revised


 


---

APPEARANCES

For the Appellant APPELLANT IN PERSON


 


MR JUSTICE MUMMERY (PRESIDENT): We have discussed your case at length both with you and between ourselves. We have reached the conclusion that your case should be allowed to proceed to a full hearing. That does not mean to say you will necessarily win. You have a good enough argument to justify it going on. The point on which we think you have an argument is this: you say that the Tribunal made an error of law in its conclusion that there was a reasonable investigation of the complaint against you, as during the course of the investigation, you were denied access to witnesses whose evidence you regarded as important to answer the complaint against you. You had been denied access to those witnesses before the disciplinary hearing, so that you could interview them. At the disciplinary hearing you were refused an adjournment to call them. You only got access to those witnesses after a pre-hearing at the Industrial Tribunal.

That is the only possible legal point in the case: whether the Tribunal was entitled in law to conclude that that was a reasonable investigation in those circumstances. The matter will proceed to a full hearing. Although you have made a good attempt in your typed argument to present your case, there is a danger that you have made it so detailed that the real point will be lost in all the details. We suggest that you should try and obtain legal representation. You can do this in a number of ways. You could go back to the Prison Officers Association and tell them that the Employment Appeal Tribunal, at a preliminary hearing, allowed you to proceed with your appeal on the grounds that you have an arguable legal point. You could ask them to consider representing you at the hearing. They could instruct Counsel or a solicitor to represent you.

You will be sent an order that you could show to the Prison Officers Association. That will state that, after a hearing held here this morning, it has been directed that your appeal should proceed to a full hearing because there is an arguable legal point in it.

We could provide a short note of just a couple of sentences of what we think the point is. That can be attached to the order sent to you.

If the Prison Officers Association feel it is not a case that they can support, there are others you can go to who can provide free representation. You can go to the Free Representation Unit, which provides free representation by Counsel in appeals before this Tribunal. It is based in Holborn. It has many barristers on its list who present cases here. They do not make a charge. The other possibility is that, with this order and the note, you could go to a private firm of solicitors and ask them to represent you and apply for Legal Aid. You can get Legal Aid in this Tribunal, even though you could not get it in the Industrial Tribunal. There would not be any problem in showing that you have a legal argument, because we have decided you have a legal argument for a Tribunal to decide later. But whether you get Legal Aid or not depends on whether you satisfy a means test.

If you cannot get Legal Aid and you cannot afford what a solicitor or barrister would charge to do your case, you can go to the CAB, to a Free Representation Unit or a local Law Centre. Your case raises an unusual point. You would be well advised to be represented legally rather than to try and do it yourself. But if you still want to do it yourself, you can.