At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE H WILSON
MR J R CROSBY
MR E HAMMOND OBE
APPELLANT | |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
For the Appellants | MR M SUPPERSTONE (QC) Head of Corporate Legal Services London Borough of Hillingdon Civic Centre Uxbridge Middx UB8 1UW |
JUDGE H WILSON: Having considered the Notice of Appeal and Mr Supperstone's submissions and amplification. We consider there should be a full hearing considering the matters of law set out in paragraph 2(i), (ii) and (iii) of Mr Supperstone's skeleton argument, namely:
Having regard to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 ("the Act"):
"(i) whether under Section 5(1) and/or 5(2) (assuming a Section 6 duty) there was an obligation on the Appellant to provide the Respondent with work at home;
(ii) whether under Section 5(1) and/or 5(2) there was an obligation on the Appellant to create work for the Respondent when none existed;
(iii) whether there was an obligation on the Appellant to offer the Respondent a job irrespective of merit. This issue raises the relationship between Section 6 of the Act and Section 7 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 ("the 1989 Act")."
We give liberty to the parties to canvass matters set out elsewhere in the skeleton argument and Notice of Appeal in support of their contentions on appeal.
Category A. 1 day.