United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MS JO POLLARD (of Counsel) Messrs Statham Gill Davies Solicitors 55 New Cavendish Street London W1M 7RE


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK: This appeal is brought by Miss Karen Higgins, the Applicant before the Bedford Industrial Tribunal which sat over five days in March and April 1997, against that Tribunal's decision to dismiss each of her various complaints brought against her former employer, Home Counties Newspapers Holdings Plc, in Originating Applications presented to the Tribunal on 25 July and 27 September 1996.

It is material to the orders which we make at this Preliminary Hearing that before the Industrial Tribunal the Appellant was represented by her partner, Mr Wilson, who is not legally qualified, and the Respondent by experienced Solicitors and Counsel. Following the Tribunal decision, promulgated with Extended Reasons on 17 June 1997, the Appellant instructed her current Solicitors, who in turn instructed Miss Pollard of Counsel in the appeal.

The Notice of Appeal runs to some 16 pages. In addition, we have before us a detailed request for the Chairman's Notes of Evidence running to 12 pages. It is said in that application "The Chairman's notes are necessary for arguing the appeal generally since the Appellant was not legally represented at the hearing". We reject that general basis for the application. This appeal tribunal is not a forum for re-running the case below. Having considered the application for the Notes we are not minded to make any order at this stage. However, there are aspects of the appeal in respect of which we do require the Chairman's assistance.

The Notice of Appeal sets out various grounds, arranged under five headings in paragraph 6 of the Notice.

The first ground of appeal focuses on the Tribunal's finding that the Respondent had made out the statutory defence under Section 41(3) of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. In sub-paragraph 1.2 it is said that:

"... there was no evidence before the Tribunal that any steps had been taken by the Respondent prior to 5th April 1995 ... to prevent Mr Steed from sexually harassing the Appellant or from doing acts of that description in the course of his employment."

We direct that the Chairman be asked to comment on that specific allegation, and if it is disputed, to set out in writing the relevant evidence which was before the Tribunal.

The fourth ground of appeal raises a complaint that the Tribunal ought to have determined a complaint of what we shall call "ordinary unfair dismissal" under Section 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Tribunal dealt with the question as to whether such a complaint was before them in paragraph 1 of the Reasons. The Chairman will be asked to comment on the allegation contained in the fourth ground of appeal, and in particular, the suggestion that there was no agreement between the parties that the Applicant's claim in her second complaint was limited so as to exclude a claim of ordinary unfair dismissal.

The fifth ground of appeal relates to alleged misconduct on the part of the Tribunal in the course of the proceedings. We direct that the Appellant file within 21 days affidavit evidence sworn in support of the complaints there set out. Once filed, that affidavit evidence will be copied and forwarded to the Chairman for her comments, together with a copy transcript of this judgment and a copy of the Notice of Appeal.

Upon receipt of the Chairman's comments on each of the matters identified in this judgment, the appeal will be re-listed for a Preliminary Hearing and Directions under the new procedure. At that stage this Tribunal will consider which, if any, points raised in the Notice of Appeal should proceed to a full hearing and give any further consequential directions.