[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> HM Prison Service v. Salmon [2000] UKEAT 21_00_2903 (29 March 2000) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/21_00_2903.html Cite as: [2000] UKEAT 21_00_2903, [2000] UKEAT 21__2903

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellants	RUTH DOWNING (of Counsel) Instructed By: Ms S Lightman Treasury Solicitor Queen Anne's Chambers 28 Broadway London SW1H 9JS


 


JUDGE COLLINS:

1. This is the preliminary hearing of an appeal against the decision of an employment tribunal sitting at Ashford, chaired by Mrs Valerie Cooney. The extended reasons were promulgated on 3 November 1999 and concerned the question of the compensation to be awarded to the respondent for a variety of acts of sex discrimination which the tribunal had previously found to have taken place.
2. The tribunal assessed the damages on the basis that 75% of the respondent's psychological condition was attributable to the sex discrimination and they awarded general damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity of £11,250, damages to feelings of £21,000 and the balance of the total award of £77,344.88 was taken up by loss of wages to the date of the hearing and future loss of wages.
3. The Notice of Appeal consists of a number of detailed criticisms of the tribunal's findings on questions of causation and quantum. All that is necessary to say for the purpose of this hearing is that having considered the matters set out in Ms Downing's skeleton argument we consider it reasonably arguable that the sums awarded in each category were too high and we accordingly direct that the matter proceed to a full hearing.
4. We shall list in Category C with a time estimate three hours on the basis that the skeleton arguments ought to be sufficiently detailed to save time at the oral hearing, skeleton arguments 14 days before the hearing.
5. This is a case where the amount of damages and the question of causation must depend upon an understanding of the medical evidence and we will direct firstly that there should be a production of the Chairman's Notes of the medical evidence and secondly, the bundle for the Tribunal should consist of the medical reports and the general practitioner's notes, the precise documents to be agreed between the parties.