United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR A J GRAHAM (Representative)


 


JUDGE PETER CLARK:

1. The issues in this appeal are first whether the Employment Tribunal chaired by Miss Stacey hearing Mrs Edmondson's application on 5 and 6 February 2001 erred in law in exercising their discretion in favour of striking out the complaint under rule 13(2)(e) of the Employment Tribunal Rules then in force, and secondly, whether the Tribunal exhibited bias or the appearance of bias in the course of the proceedings.
2. This week the Court of Appeal has delivered judgment in the case of Bennett v. London Borough of Southwark, Neutral Citation Number [2002] EWCA Civ 223. We have had an opportunity to read the judgments in that case and it seems to us that potentially important matters of principle arise in relation to the Tribunal's power or the exercise of the Tribunal's power to strike out in these circumstances. Accordingly, without expressing any view as to the merits or demerits of this particular appeal, we think it appropriate for this case to be fully argued at a hearing, at which the Respondent is present and represented.
3. In these circumstances we shall direct that the appeal proceed on the basis of the original grounds and an amended ground which was prepared by Miss McNeill of Counsel, who gave advice to Mrs Edmondson under the ELAAS pro-bono scheme and which has been adopted by Mr Graham, who has conducted the case on her behalf today.
4. The case will be listed, Category B with a time estimate of one day. Permission is formally given for the amendment sought for the Notice of Appeal to add the new ground prepared by Miss McNeill. There will be an exchange of skeleton arguments between the parties, not less than 14 days before the date fixed for the full hearing. Copies of those skeleton arguments to be lodged with this court at the same time.