United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR P OLDHAM (OF COUNSEL) (Instructed by) London Borough of Southwark Southwark Legal (Contract) Services South House 30-32 Peckham Road London SE5 8UB


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK: This is an Appeal by the Employer, the London Borough of Southwark, against a decision of the London (South) Employment Tribunal promulgated with extended reasons on 22^nd February 1999, upholding the Applicant, Ms Whillier's claims of sex discrimination and action short of dismissal by reason of trade union activities contrary to Section 146 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Consolidation Act 1992. Having considered the grounds of Appeal, Skeleton Argument and oral submissions made to us today by Mr Peter Oldham, we are satisfied that this Appeal ought to proceed to a full hearing.

1. We would make only one observation on the grounds advanced. By reference to the Skeleton Argument before us, a copy of which is to be served forthwith on the Respondent, at paragraphs 9 and 22, we foresee that there may be an argument raised on the basis of the majority opinions in the House of Lords' decision in the case of Nagarajan decided on 15^th July 1999 as to the identity of particular employees who are alleged to have discriminated against the Applicant, both in relation to her claim under Section 146 and her claim under the Sex Discrimination Act. We say no more about that point. We have raised it with Mr Oldham. We anticipate there may be argument on the point at the full hearing.
2. For the purpose of that hearing, we give the following directions. First, the Appellant is granted leave to amend its Notice of Appeal to add Ground (xi) to the grounds under the Sex Discrimination Act. The Appellant is to lodge an Amended Notice of Appeal in those terms within 7 days. The Appeal itself will be listed for 1 full day, category B. There will be exchange of skeleton arguments between the parties not less than 14 days before the date fixed for the full appeal hearing. Copies of those skeleton arguments to be lodged at the same time with the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
3. Finally, Mr Oldham has faintly raised the question of Chairman's notes of evidence. We do not consider that such a direction is necessary in this case.