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!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Gulf Oil v Dyas [1999] UKEAT 1148_98_2107 (21 July 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/1148_98_2107.html Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 1148_98_2107 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MORISON (P)
(AS IN CHAMBERS)
APPELLANT | |
RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
Revised
For the Appellant | NO APPEARANCE OR REPRESENTATION BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT |
For the Respondent | MR B ADAMSON (OF COUNSEL) (Instructed by) Eaton-Evans Morris Haverford West Pembrokeshire SA61 2DB |
MR JUSTICE MORISON (PRESIDENT): Exceptionally in this case, I am prepared to ask for notes of evidence of the two live witnesses in respect of whom notes have not yet been provided. That is Mr Warlow and Mr Seal. Both of them were Gulf Oils witnesses. There was a witness for the Applicant, a Mr Symons. His evidence was given in the form of a witness statement. He did not give live evidence. Accordingly, as the Tribunal have already provided their notes of evidence of Mr Dyas, by providing the notes of evidence in relation to Mr Warlow and Mr Seal, the Employment Appeal Tribunal will then have the totality of the evidence in this case because they will also have available Mr Symons' written statement. The reason why I take the view that it would be just for these notes to be provided is because the Appellants, Gulf Oil, are running a perversity and "contrary to the weight of the evidence" argument as advanced in paragraph 5(1) and in particular, at 5(1)(b) and it seems to me that the Respondent to this Appeal can rightly say that whilst there may not be material in the Applicant's, Mr Dyas' own evidence, relating to various issues, they would be prejudiced if reliance was placed on the absence of evidence from him on those issues when there was, in fact, evidence given by the Respondent's own witnesses on which the Tribunal could have founded their decision.