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 >> Pennock & Anor v M & M Knitwear (1982) Ltd [1997] UKEAT 345_97_2706 (27 June 1997)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1997/345_97_2706.html
Cite as: [1997] UKEAT 345_97_2706
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MORISON (PRESIDENT)
MR A C BLYGHTON
MR P A L PARKER CBE
(1) MISS T PENNOCK
(2) MISS J HEWITT APPELLANTS
M & M KNITWEAR (1982) LTD RESPONDENT
(2) MISS J HEWITT |
APPELLANTS |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING - EX PARTE
| For the Appellants | MR W STRUTHERS (Solicitor) Citizens Advice Bureau Bath Lane Stockton TS18 2EQ |
MR JUSTICE MORISON (PRESIDENT): The purpose of this hearing was to determine whether there was an arguable point of law raised in the appeals which have been presented on behalf of two former employees of M & M Knitwear (1982) Ltd. Both of them complained of sexual harassment. Both of them were given awards of compensation which, it is said, are too low, having regard to other decisions.
Whilst in the normal course of events the Employment Appeal Tribunal would regard the assessment of compensation for injury to feelings and aggravated damages awards as matters falling essentially within the Industrial Tribunal's discretion, it does seem to us that there are grounds for thinking that Industrial Tribunals would be greatly assisted if this Court were to give some general guidance on the approach to compensation in cases such as these.
We consider that it is arguable that the awards that were made in the cases were too small. But it is principally because we think that this case raises a more general question that we are giving leave. It would be of considerable assistance to the Court if the Equal Opportunities Commission were made aware of these proceedings and invited to take them over and instruct Counsel.
It goes without saying that we shall require from the appellants, however they are represented, a skeleton argument which will rehearse the factors which it is contended an Industrial Tribunal should take into account when assessing awards such as these, and with some indication of the levels awards in other cases, so that the Employment Appeal Tribunal can then consider whether guidance is required and if so what guidance to give.