|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions >> Abegaze v Shrewsbury College of Arts & Technology  EWCA Civ 96 (20 February 2009)
Cite as:  EWCA Civ 96,  IRLR 238
[New search] [Context] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
COURT OF APPEAL (CIVIL DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
HIS HONOUR JUDGE McMULLEN QC
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
B e f o r e :
LORD JUSTICE RIMER
LORD JUSTICE ELIAS
|- and -
|SHREWSBURY COLLEGE OF ARTS & TECHNOLOGY
WordWave International Limited
A Merrill Communications Company
190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400, Fax No: 020 7831 8838
Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MR ANDREW McGRATH (instructed by SHROPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL LEGAL DIVISION) for the Respondent
Hearing date: 9TH FEBRUARY 2009
Crown Copyright ©
LORD JUSTICE ELIAS :
"The claimant now feels capable of co-operating with all parties and wishes to proceed with the remedies hearing of this matter as quickly as possible."
The relevant law.
" a chairman or tribunal may make a judgment or order
(c) striking out any claim or response (or part of one) on the grounds that the manner in which the proceedings have been conducted by or on behalf of the claimant or the respondent (as the case may be) has been scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious;
(d) striking out a claim which has not been actively pursued;
..(f) striking out a claim where the chairman or tribunal considers that it is no longer possible to have a fair hearing in those proceedings."
The judge's approach.
" The Chairman very clearly recollects that although the decision on the merits was by a majority only, that the Tribunal as a whole held some preliminary views, which were unanimous, as to the claimant's entitlement as far as compensation was concerned. The Chairman wishes to emphasise that these were preliminary views only, expressed at the time, in private, and that there is absolutely no doubt that all members of the Tribunal were keeping an open mind, subject to hearing further evidence, medical evidence and submissions from both parties. Nonetheless, it is true that such opinions were expressed, in private, albeit in an informal way. It is going to be very difficult for the Chairman to expunge that from his memory, and to ensure that, if this remedy hearing proceeds with two other lay members, to ensure that he does not try to influence those lay members."
He recognised that it was theoretically possible for the remedy to be heard by a separately constituted tribunal but considered that it was desirable that the same tribunal should conduct the remedies hearing.
The hearing before the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
The issues on appeal.
LORD JUSTICE RIMER:
LORD JUSTICE WARD: