[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Jenkins v. Torside Ltd & Ors [2002] UKEAT 1032_01_0102 (1 February 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2002/1032_01_0102.html Cite as: [2002] UKEAT 1032_1_102, [2002] UKEAT 1032_01_0102

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR PAUL GREATOREX (of Counsel) Instructed by: Messrs Steggles Solicitors 121A Saughall Road Blacon Chester CH1 5ET


 


MR RECORDER LANGSTAFF QC

1. Because we propose to give permission for this matter to continue so that it may be heard inter partes, we shall say, very briefly, only what our conclusions are.
2. We think that there is an arguable case raised by the Notice of Appeal as presently constituted that the Tribunal may have reached a Decision which was contrary to the evidence. This will require a consideration as to whether the evidence, taken as a whole, supports what is said in paragraph 6 of the Notice of Appeal, in respect of Mr John Jenkins and paragraph 6 in respect of Mr Jason Jenkins.
3. Before us, we have had an application to amend the Notice of Appeal. Mr Greatorex wishes to argue that the Employment Tribunal erred in law in that the facts found did not constitute a strike or other industrial action, within the meaning of the Employment Rights Act, section 237.
4. We propose to give leave for the Notices of Appeal to be amended by the addition, in the case of John Jenkins, of paragraph 11 to that effect, and in the case of Mr Jason Jenkins, paragraph 12 to that effect. We do so upon the condition that an amended Notice of Appeal is received by this Tribunal no later than close of business today. We have been assured that this is easily possible. We do so on the basis that this clarifies rather than expands the scope of the original Notice, and we think it is a properly arguable point.
5. We say no more about the merits of the appeal. As to directions, we direct that the Chairman's Notes of Evidence of the Jenkins brothers, that is John Jenkins and Jason Jenkins, and of Mr Bernard Bradley, be provided.
6. We direct that the Skeleton Arguments for the appeal be provided no less than seven days prior to the hearing, together with copies of any cases to be relied upon. The case will be listed in Category B, with a time estimate of two hours.
7. We note that a number of other employees were involved in the Employment Tribunal proceedings. Their claim continues. We do not think it necessary that they participate in this appeal, which relates purely to the Jenkins brothers. If any of those employees wishes to attend or be represented at the hearing, they must make application to that effect, otherwise the parties to this appeal will simply be the two brothers, Jenkins and the Respondent, Torside Ltd