United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	NO APPEARANCE OR REPRESENTATION BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT


 


JUDGE D M LEVY QC: Mr D.M. Cooper, who is not present today, appeals against a decision of an Employment Tribunal sitting at Ashford, Kent. The Tribunal sat on 16 October 1998. Its decision was given on 20 October 1998. The decision was that UK Auto Film Ltd, the Respondent named by him in his IT1 ("the Respondent") should pay to him certain sums of money.

From that decision Mr Cooper appeals, notwithstanding he was given the relief which he sought in his IT1. From the documents he has submitted for the appeal we understand that in fact he did not really want relief from the Respondent, as named in the IT1, but from a body to which the Respondent might have transferred his assets.

There is a suggestion in the papers that the experienced Chairman who heard his application might, in some way have misled him, but when an Applicant receives from an Employment Tribunal the order which, on the face of the papers he has sought in his application, it seems to us that there is no matter on which an appeal can properly be mounted.

In these circumstances we dismiss his appeal.

Judge D M Levy QC

Please note that EAT/1322/98 & EAT/862/98 are now typed as separate judgments.

Iris

13 April 1998

Jeanette/Emma

EAT/1322/98 & EAT/862/98

I put these two judgments together for the 1st yellow draft.. I was able to separate the judgments when I did the 2nd blue drafts.

Iris