United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR HASSAN MUGHAL Representative 1 Norfolk Chase Warfield Berks. RG42 3XN


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK: In this case the Appellant, Mr Mirza, appeals against a decision of the Industrial Tribunal sitting at Leeds over five days in November 1997 dismissing his complaint both of unfair dismissal and unlawful racial discrimination.

The notice of appeal dated 2 January 1997 (1998) raises grounds of appeal against both the finding of no compensation in relation to the unfair dismissal found by the Industrial Tribunal and against the dismissal of his complaint of racial discrimination.

At the end of both paragraphs 1 and 2 of the grounds of appeal the Appellant seeks to reserve his position in relation to new and additional pleadings. That course is not permissible under paragraph 2(6) of the Employment Appeal practice direction and accordingly we shall strike out the final paragraphs under both paragraph 1 and paragraph 2 of the grounds of appeal.

More substantively the grounds of appeal do not encompass any complaint about the conduct of the hearing below by the Industrial Tribunal. In a skeleton argument prepared for the purpose of today's preliminary hearings, Mr Mughal, who appears on behalf of the Appellant, includes a heading "Complaint against the conduct of the IT and Chairman" and beneath that says:

"A separate affidavit states that the conduct of the Chairman in the IT through his remarks and conduct compromised the fairness of the proceedings. The applicant appeals to the EAT to consider this serious allegation and its consequences on the original IT."

At the hearing this morning we have drawn Mr Mughal's attention to paragraph 9 of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Practice Direction, which provides that:

"A party who intends to complain about the conduct of the Industrial Tribunal ... must include in the Notice of Appeal full and sufficient particulars of the complaint."

Paragraph 9 goes on to provide that the Registrar in those circumstances shall give appropriate directions for the preliminary hearing, which normally includes the swearing and filing of affidavits by or on behalf of the Appellant in relation to the complaints about the conduct of the Industrial Tribunal. Once such affidavits have been sworn and filed it is the practice for copies of the grounds of appeal, together with those affidavits, to be sent to the Chairman of the Industrial Tribunal for his comments and, if necessary, the comments of the lay Members who sat with him.

None of that has been done in this case. In these circumstances, Mr Mughal applies for an adjournment of today's preliminary hearing for the purpose of amending his Notice of Appeal so as to add the complaints which he wishes to raise against the Tribunal's conduct of the proceedings below and also to give him an opportunity to swear and file an affidavit. At present we simply have before us an unsworn statement by Mr Mughal which sets out the nature of the complaints which he wishes to raise.

We have acceded to that application. We shall adjourn this preliminary hearing and direct that within 14 days of today's date the Appellant shall lodge draft amended grounds of appeal, which set out the nature of the complaints made about the conduct of the Industrial Tribunal in this case, together with sworn affidavits on behalf of the Appellant relating to those complaints. Once the amended grounds of appeal and affidavit evidence has been received by this Tribunal, copies shall be sent to the Industrial Tribunal Chairman for his comments. Once those comments are received copies of them will be sent to the parties, and this matter may be relisted for the restored preliminary hearing.