[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Crystal Cleaning Company (UK) Ltd v. Chandler [1999] UKEAT 387_99_0112 (1 December 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/387_99_0112.html Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 387_99_112, [1999] UKEAT 387_99_0112

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	No appearance
For the Respondent	No appearance


 


HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER CLARK

1. This appeal came before a division on which I sat for a preliminary hearing on 15 June 1999. On that occasion the appeal was permitted to proceed to a full hearing on the basis of the grounds set out in the amended Notice of Appeal dated 3 February 1999. We did not then make an order for Chairman's Notes of Evidence, but gave the parties liberty to apply to me if such a direction was thought necessary.
2. Further application for the Chairman's Notes was made by letter from the Appellant's solicitors dated 13 September 1999. That application has been listed for hearing before me today. Neither party is present. I have considered the Appellant's solicitor's letter dated 29 November 1999; I quite understand why they are not present and no discourtesy is taken.
3. The issue to which, in my view, the Notes are relevant is this. The Southampton Employment Tribunal reached a majority decision on the Applicant, Mr Chandler's complaint of unlawful disability discrimination. In paragraph 7 of the Tribunal's reasoned decision dated 18 December 1998 the majority concluded that although his rudeness to his Manager, Mrs Caddick, was the ostensible reason for his dismissal, she should have been aware that it was related to his disability (epilepsy) as a result of the stress arising from a discussion between them on 22 April 1998. The minority member at paragraph 8 observed that there was no medical evidence to show that the Applicants reactions in that interview were as a result of his disability.
4. In the absence of any specific finding of fact by the Tribunal at paragraph 3 of their reasons, I shall direct that the Chairman be asked to comment, by reference to his Notes of Evidence, as to whether or not there was any medical evidence connecting the Applicant's behaviour on 22 April 1998 with his medical condition and its treatment and/or whether he was suffering from stress on that day as a result of his condition and/or its treatment. If not he should say so; if there was, could he kindly provide the relevant extracts from his notes? A copy of the amended Notice of Appeal and this Judgment should be sent to the Chairman.