United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellants	NO APPEARANCE BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK:

1. The applicant, Mr Bell, commenced these proceedings by an Originating Application presented to the Shrewsbury Employment Tribunal on 2^nd November 1998. He named as respondent David Waugh How Produce Ltd ["HPL"]. His claim was for damages for breach of contract arising on the termination of his employment, he alleged with HPL, as General Manager in August 1998. We see from the applicant's letter of appointment dated 28^th August 1997, on HPL notepaper, that Mr David Waugh, who signed that letter, describes himself as Group Managing Director.
2. A Notice of Appearance, signed by Mr Waugh and dated 11^th November 1998, denied any breach of contract and contended that the applicant was employed by How Produce Catering Ltd ["Catering"].
3. The matter came before a Chairman, Mr D P Thompson, sitting alone at Shrewsbury on 27^th January and 11^th February 1999. We interpose to refer to a letter from Mr L Ross of Grant Thornton, who wrote to the Employment Tribunal on 19^th January 1999, stating that he was appointed liquidator of Catering on 18^th December 1998. He said that he was unaware of any claim by Mr Bell.
4. By a decision with extended reasons dated 1^st March 1999 the Chairman found that Catering was the proper respondent, and ordered Catering to pay to the applicant the sum of £7,469.06 ["the original decision"].
5. Against the original decision the liquidator of Catering appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal by letter dated 9^th March 1999. That appeal has been listed for preliminary hearing before us today.
6. Meanwhile, the applicant applied for a review of the original decision on the grounds that the proper respondent was HPL. That application was granted and following a review hearing before a full Employment Tribunal chaired by Mr Thompson on 26^th April 1999, by a decision with extended reasons dated 6^th May ["the review decision"] the original decision was varied by substituting HPL for Catering as the respondent liable to pay the sum originally awarded to the applicant. A copy of the review decision was helpfully forwarded to this Employment Appeal Tribunal on 6^th May by the Shrewsbury Employment Tribunal.
7. On 24^th May 1999, on my direction, a member of this tribunal staff faxed the liquidator of Catering enclosing a copy of the review decision and enquired whether or not he intended to pursue the appeal listed for today? There has been no response to that fax.
8. The position therefore is that today there is no order by the Employment Tribunal against Catering (in liquidation) as a result of the review decision. It follows that this appeal is now rendered redundant and we shall formally dismiss it.
9. As a postscript, it appears that Mr Bell is still not out of the wood. We understand from the Notice of Appeal in this case that HPL went into liquidation on 3^rd February 1999.