BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Lee v. Defence Evaluation Research Agency [2000] UKEAT 1296_00_1412 (14 December 2000)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/1296_00_1412.html
Cite as: [2000] UKEAT 1296_00_1412, [2000] UKEAT 1296__1412

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]


BAILII case number: [2000] UKEAT 1296_00_1412
Appeal No. EAT/1296/00

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 14 December 2000

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE D M LEVY QC

MRS J M MATTHIAS

MR R SANDERSON OBE



DR R A LEE APPELLANT

DEFENCE EVALUATION RESEARCH AGENCY RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING

© Copyright 2000


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellant MRS P M DUFFAY
    Representative
    Instructed by
    The Employment Law Advice Centre
    22 St Edmunds Road
    Northampton
    NN1 5EH
       


     

    JUDGE LEVY QC

  1. We have before us today an Appeal by Dr Lee in which the Respondents are the Defence Evaluation Research Agency. Miss Duffay appears on this ex parte Preliminary Application. It follows a remedy hearing following a long hearing on the merits case where a majority decided on one aspect of the case in the Appellant's favour.
  2. We have just before this preliminary appeal heard an appeal by the Respondent to this appeal against the main decision of the Employment Tribunal. We therefore are in the unusual situation of having representatives of both sides still in Court for the hearing of the appeal against quantum by the Appellant.
  3. Both sides agreed (at our suggestion) that it would not be sensible for Dr Lee's appeal to be considered until after the decision on the Respondent's appeal has been determined. We will therefore not make any other order on this preliminary hearing, other than that it should be listed for a further hearing immediately after the decision in the Respondents appeal has been promulgated, when both parties may want to reconsider their position.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/1296_00_1412.html