At the Tribunal | |
Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER CLARK
LORD DAVIES OF COITY CBE
MR J C SHRIGLEY
APPELLANT | |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
For the Appellant | NO APPEARANCE OR REPRESENTATION BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT |
JUDGE PETER CLARK
(1) that the Employment Tribunal was entitled to find that, although not perfect, there was adequate consultation with the Appellant by Mrs Harrison before dismissal
(2) that under the procedure followed by Mrs Harrison the Appellant was made aware that her employment was in jeopardy and she was given a proper opportunity to make representations. Indeed, at the second meeting held on 17 May 1999 the Appellant conceded that her eyesight was not good enough to allow her to perform her job properly. That matter was in dispute below, but the Employment Tribunal resolved that factual issue in favour of the Respondent (reasons, paragraph 8). The appeal point, now raised by the Appellant's solicitors as something of an afterthought, does not appear to have been taken below.
(3) there was ample evidence before the Employment Tribunal from Mrs Harison showing the adjustments which had been made over a period of years by Bri-Tone to accommodate the Appellant's deteriorating eyesight. It was open to the Employment Tribunal to conclude that it was not reasonable to expect any further adjustments to be made and therefore to find that the discrimination was justified.