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 >> Holbrook v. Pearce Festive Lighting Ltd [1999] UKEAT 425_99_2307 (23 July 1999)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/425_99_2307.html
Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 425_99_2307
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE D M LEVY QC
MRS J M MATTHIAS
MR S M SPRINGER MBE
MR T J HOLBROOK APPELLANT
PEARCE FESTIVE LIGHTING LTD RESPONDENT
| APPELLANT | |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
- It is quite apparent from the four corners of the decision that the Appellant was to be paid quarterly and indeed the Tribunal say in paragraph 16 of their decision:
| For the Appellant | MR D GREENE (of Counsel) APPEARING UNDER EMPLOYMENT LAW APPEALS ADVICE SCHEME (ELAAS) |
JUDGE LEVY: This appeal by Mr D J Holbrook follows a decision of Industrial Tribunal promulgated as recently as 15 February 1999, when they held that he was not unfairly dismissed, but ordered the Respondent to the Appeal, his employer, to pay damages of £423.07 breach of contract.
"For someone in his position we consider that a reasonable period of notice would have been 3 months. This is one week short of the 11 weeks that the applicant has already received."
In our judgment if a period of three month's notice is given, prima facie the reference is to a period of 13 weeks. What was given here prima facie was two weeks short of the Applicant's entitlement. Rather than send this matter for a full appeal which the Respondent might find expensive, it seems sensible to us to take this course: to remit the matter back to the Employment Tribunal to consider whether it can review its decision, unless the Respondent chooses in the meantime to pay the modest sum which Mr Holbrook claims is still due to him. We thank Mr Greene for his assistance on this matter. If no solution satisfactory to the Appellant has been reached, the Appeal must go to a full hearing.