[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Whitbread Walker Ltd v. Jones [2001] UKEAT 1084_99_0309 (3 September 2001) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2001/1084_99_0309.html Cite as: [2001] UKEAT 1084_99_309, [2001] UKEAT 1084_99_0309

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	THE APPELLANT NEITHER PRESENT NOR REPRESENTED
For the Respondent	MR THOMAS KIBLING (Of Counsel) Instructed by: Messrs Eversheds Solicitors Fitzalan House Fitzalan Road Cardiff CF24 OEE


 


MR RECORDER LANGSTAFF QC

1. From the Employment Tribunal sitting at Cardiff, we have been presented with an application by the Appellant for an adjournment. The application has come in fact from the representative due to appear for the Appellant and is made by telephone upon the grounds of his physical difficulty in being here and his illness since he has been taken with an attack of gout.
2. We are told that he has attempted to obtain a replacement but in the short time available has been unable to do so. Mr Kibling who appears for the Respondent, upon instructions, very fairly has indicated to us that he does not think it appropriate to oppose this application if an early hearing date can be obtained.
3. He points out that it is now some 3½ years since the dismissal upon which the facts of the case are based and that any appeal needs to be urgently and promptly heard.
4. We agree with both submissions made to us that of the Appellant seeking an adjournment and that of Mr Kibling seeking expedition.
5. Accordingly, we propose to allow the adjournment which had been sought and I shall direct that this matter should come on for hearing next Tuesday, which is 11 September. In the interests of the Respondent the case will be listed not before 2 pm. If it turns out that Mr Johnstone who had intended to appear to represent the Appellant as he has done before is unable through illness or any other reason to attend on that date we would expect that a replacement representative will be present to argue a point which we think is a discrete point of law (as Mr Kibling submits) which is capable of being dealt with by a representative of reasonable competence if instructed in reasonable time, which can be a relatively short time before the hearing.
6. Accordingly, we should direct that it will be heard on that date. If as I have said Mr Johnstone is unavailable and if the Appellant has been unable to secure the services of any other representative we shall accede to the invitation made to us by telephone to deal with the matter, so far as the Appellant is concerned, upon the papers.