Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
If you found BAILII useful today, could you please make a contribution?
Your donation will help us maintain and extend our databases of legal information. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month donates, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Thomas Pink Ltd v Fernandez [1997] UKEAT 982_97_2511 (25 November 1997)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1997/982_97_2511.html
Cite as: [1997] UKEAT 982_97_2511
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE B HARGROVE QC
MR J D DALY
MISS S M WILSON
THOMAS PINK LTD APPELLANT
MISS M FERNANDEZ RESPONDENT
| APPELLANT | |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
| For the Appellants | MR H BALLANTYNE Representative Mr W Mellor Head of Human Resources Thomas Pink Ltd 1 Havelock Terrace London SW8 4AF |
JUDGE B HARGROVE QC: We have considered this matter. We are of the view that it would be correct to allow this matter to proceed to a full hearing upon the basis of the matters set forth at vi. a,b and c of the grounds of appeal.
In relation to the question of perversity, it seems to us that there are only two valid points. The first is that the Tribunal appears to have taken no account of the fact that the Appellant has the legal duty towards the Airport Authority and hence the errors became of somewhat more importance in the selling of goods and the second that there is no reference to the fact that the Respondent was taken through the till procedure again by an expert in order to demonstrate that it was not an error in the till but an error in his operation. Those are the only two points on which we think there is anything by way of perversity to be argued and it is, therefore, only upon those two points that we shall order Chairman's notes in those two areas and no more.
There will also be an order that skeleton arguments on both sides should be filed and exchanged 28 days before the hearing and there is a time estimate of one day, category C.