United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellants	MR ANTONY SENDALL (of Counsel) Instructed by: Mr J Calladine Messrs Robinsons Solicitors 83 Friar Gate Derby DE1 1FL


 


MR JUSTICE MORISON (PRESIDENT): The purpose of this hearing is to determine whether there is an arguable point of law in an appeal which has been raised against an Industrial Tribunal decision promulgated on 20th March 1998.

It seems to us quite clear that the appeal raises issues of law which will have to be determined a full hearing. Those issues can be summarised in this way:

(1) The true construction of Regulation 5;

(2) the proper construction of Regulation 6;

(3) whether two decisions of the Employment Appeal Tribunal, namely BET Catering Services v Ball & Others and Whent & Others v T Cartledge Ltd should be followed;

(4) whether the Industrial Tribunal have correctly dealt with the issues which arose in relation to an individual employee, a respondent, Mr Lutak. They have failed, so it is said, to ask themselves whether the alterations to that person's contract were transfer connected or not.

Those four points seems to us to be obviously arguable.

Having looked at the PHD forms, it seems to us, although the estimate time is shorter by both parties, this case will take one day. We do not require the Notes of Evidence; neither party is asking for them. If there is a question, as there is, as to whether previous decisions of this Court should be followed, it will be appropriate that it should come before the President. It will therefore be marked 'Category P'. The appellants seek leave to amend their Notice of Appeal in the form set out in the appellant's skeleton argument at paragraph 1. We are happy to allow that amendment because we think that it makes clear that which was opaque in the original Notice of Appeal.

Accordingly, this matter will proceed to a full hearing on a date to be fixed.