United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR MICHEL KALLIPETIS QC (ELAAS)


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK: This is an appeal by Mr Vadehra against a decision of a Chairman, Miss Lewzey, sitting alone at the Stratford Industrial Tribunal on 2nd December 1997 striking out his Origination Application for failure to comply with the tribunal's order for further and better particulars made on 24th July 1997.

This morning we have had the advantage of hearing argument from Mr Kallipetis QC on behalf of the appellant under the ELAAS scheme. He has put before us the original request for further and better particulars of the Originating Application in respect of which the order was made, and the two subsequent attempts by the appellant to answer that request.

Mr Kallipetis puts the appeal in three ways:

(1) that a striking out order is so draconian that it should only be used in a clear and obvious case and this is not such a case;

(2) that a striking order would normally only be made where there is contumelious breach of the tribunal's order. That is a deliberate refusal to comply with the order at all or in any adequate way. He submits that this a case, at its highest, of incompetence, inexperience or simple inability to deal with the procedural requirements of the tribunal;

(3) he submits on the authority of this tribunal's decision in National Grid Co. Ltd v Virdee [1992] IRLR 555, that a striking out order should only be made where no fair trial of the issues in the case can take place. There is no such finding by the Chairman in this case. At paragraph 13 of her reasons she simply says that she:

"... is satisfied that the Respondents would be prejudiced because they are unable to provide a full defence on the basis of the particulars provided."

That, he submits, is not the same as saying that a fair trial is not possible.

Having considered those submission, we are satisfied that an arguable case for a full hearing is made out. We shall permit the matter to proceed. The case will be listed for two hours, Category C. There are no further directions save that copies of the original request for further and better particulars, the order of the tribunal dated 24th July 1997 and the two subsequent replies to that request should be available for this Appeal Tribunal at the full hearing, with typed copies of the manuscript replies.