United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MS CAROL DAVIS (of Counsel) Messrs Mills & Reeve Solicitors Francis House 112 Hills Road Cambridge CB2 1PH


 


MR JUSTICE MAURICE KAY: We have decided to let this appeal proceed to a full hearing.

1. This is not the only case in the recent past where this Appeal Tribunal has been made aware of proceedings in Employment Tribunals where respondents who take the view that the applicant has no prospect of success have tried to have the complaint struck out by reference Rule 12 of the 1993 Procedure Rules.
2. We are satisfied that this is a suitable case in which that particular jurisdiction and the way in which it was exercised in this case, ought properly to be reviewed in the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
3. We observe in addition in the present case that there is an apparent inconsistency between what the Chairman of the Employment Tribunal said when giving his reasons for refusing to strike out the applicant's complaint and what he said slightly later, when requiring the applicant to pay a deposit as a precondition of continuing with the case.
4. In all the circumstances, we are satisfied that this is a suitable matter for further consideration. We consider that the appellant has a legitimate interest in trying to dispose of the case in this way, rather than after a hearing in the Employment Tribunal with evidence and cross-examination. Accordingly it will go to a full hearing. Time estimate 2 hours, usual directions as to skeleton arguments and listing Category B.