[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Commissioner Of Police For The Metropolis v White [1996] UKEAT 497_95_1510 (15 October 1996) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1996/497_95_1510.html Cite as: [1996] UKEAT 497_95_1510

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MISS CARRS-FRISK (of Counsel) Metropolitan Police Solicitors Department New Scotland Yard Broadway London SW1H 0BG
For the Respondent	MR C N FRERE-SMITH (Solicitor) Messrs Frere-Smith & Co Solicitors 67 Upper Berkeley Street London W1H 7DH


 


MR JUSTICE MORISON (PRESIDENT): The circumstances in which this matter comes before me sitting on my own are somewhat unusual.

An Industrial Tribunal has held in favour of an applicant against the Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis in respect of a complaint of unlawful discrimination on the grounds of his sex. That decision was entered in the Register and promulgated on 3rd April 1995.

The Metropolitan Police wish to appeal against that decision, and have served a Notice of Appeal, essentially alleging errors of fact or of a factual nature such as perversity. Understandably in that context, the matter was therefore listed for a preliminary hearing. The matter came before a division of this court presided over by His Honour Judge Byrt, and that tribunal having heard the representations of Miss Carrs-Frisk on behalf of the Police, concluded that the matter should come before this court for a full hearing of the appeal. One of the orders that was made by this court on that occasion was a direction that the Chairman be asked to produce her Notes of Evidence in manuscript form. That order has been complied with in manuscript form. Her notes have been produced. Without in any way being critical, I should point out that, as is to be expected, in manuscript form those notes are difficult to read.

It seems to me that it is most unlikely that when the matter comes before the Employment Appeal Tribunal for a full hearing, any reference or any extensive reference to the Notes of Evidence will be required. I am completely un-persuaded by Miss Carrs-Frisk this afternoon, that any such reference will be required, but I will not tie the hands of the court which is ultimately going to have to hear this appeal.

She has submitted that I have no power to interfere with the decision of this court that was made on the earlier occasion, not least because I am sitting without the advantage of two lay members. I take the view that it would be appropriate for me to vary the order that was made. The tribunal Chairman has been asked to produce the Notes of Evidence and has done so. I simply indicate that if the parties wish to refer to any evidence, they should first try and agree a typescript transcript of the evidence, and that if they are unable to do so, then the matter will be listed before me for further directions.

I also direct that there will have to be an application to the Employment Appeal Tribunal when the matter comes before the court for a full hearing to refer to any particular evidence, and that it will be open to the Employment Appeal Tribunal to refuse to consider the Notes of Evidence in typescript form, if in their view, they will not advance the argument which is being made. I do not think that represents any significant departure from the previous order, because it was implicit in the previous order that the Notes of Evidence would come in manuscript form and presumably only limited use would be made of them at the hearing. But in view of the way this matter is being conducted, it seems to me desirable to make it plain that any such notes will have to be in typescript form, to be agreed between the parties, and then only used if the Employment Appeal Tribunal considers that it is necessary in the interests of justice that it should be.

Accordingly to that extent, I vary the order made by the Employment Appeal Tribunal on a previous occasion.