Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Maher v Post Office [1999] UKEAT 1347_98_0303 (3 March 1999)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/1347_98_0303.html
Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 1347_98_303, [1999] UKEAT 1347_98_0303
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE HOLLAND
MRS J M MATTHIAS
MS B SWITZER
MR K F MAHER APPELLANT
THE POST OFFICE RESPONDENT
| APPELLANT | |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
| For the Appellant | Neither Present nor Represented |
MR JUSTICE HOLLAND This appeal comes before us today by way of a preliminary hearing. Is there anything in this appeal which would merit an inter-partes hearing? The short answer is 'no', there is nothing at all. We are able to take that robust line in the following circumstances.
This originates as a complaint of unfair dismissal. It was listed before an Industrial Tribunal held at Liverpool on 20 July 1998. On that occasion, the Applicant did not appear. He had given no prior notice and under those circumstances, the Tribunal dismissed the complaint. Thereafter the Applicant wrote to the Tribunal proffering an excuse for his non-attendance. It was decided that this amounted to an application for a review of the decision to dismiss his complaint, and a hearing was specified for that application before an Employment Tribunal held at Liverpool on 2 October 1998. In the event, the Applicant did not appear, yet further he had given no notice at all of his intention to be absent. In those circumstances, that application for the review was dismissed.
He appeals to this Tribunal proffering some further excuse. In the event, notwithstanding it has been listed this morning, he has not appeared. Again, this Tribunal has received no prior notification of his intention not to appear nor indeed any explanation. In those circumstances, we have no hesitation in dismissing this appeal. There is plainly no reasonable prospect of it ever being prosecuted no more than the original applications were prosecuted before the Tribunals below.