Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> A M Searle Dock Shunting Services v Liddle [1996] UKEAT 601_96_0910 (9 October 1996)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1996/601_96_0910.html
Cite as: [1996] UKEAT 601_96_0910, [1996] UKEAT 601_96_910
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE H J BYRT QC
MRS M T PROSSER
MR J C SHRIGLEY
A M SEARLE DOCK SHUNTING SERVICES APPELLANT
MR R LIDDLE
RESPONDENT
| APPELLANT | |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
| For the Appellant | MR A M SEARLE (Owner) |
JUDGE H J BYRT QC: This is an application by way of a preliminary hearing for leave for the matter to go forward to a full hearing. Mr Searle, objects to the basic calculations of the award, given to the Applicant now the Respondent to this Appeal. Essentially, he is complaining about the fact that the Tribunal have awarded him five weeks' pay at the maximum of £210 per week for the period of time that he would have been entitled to by way of notice on the termination of his contract.
Mr Searle, who has himself argued this matter in front of us, thinks that by reason of the fact that the Respondent was disabled and unable to work during that period of time should not be awarded any sum in lieu of notice. With the greatest respect to Mr Searle, we think that this point is unarguable in law. The Respondent is entitled contractually to have notice, and if he is not given notice, then he is entitled to be compensated in lieu. Accordingly, we do not see a point of law here to be argued and we refuse leave for this case to go forward.