[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Milton Keynes Community NHS Trust v Blakeney [1996] UKEAT 783_94_0805 (8 May 1996) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1996/783_94_0805.html Cite as: [1996] UKEAT 783_94_0805, [1996] UKEAT 783_94_805

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

BAILII case number: [1996] UKEAT 783_94_0805

Appeal No. EAT/783/94

EMPOLYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL

58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

At the Tribunal

On 8 May 1996

Before

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MUMMERY (P)

MS S R CORBY

MR L D COWAN

---

MILTON KEYNES COMMUNITY NHS TRUST          APPELLANT

MRS C A BLAKENEY          RESPONDENTS

---

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

Revised


 


---

APPEARANCES

For the Appellants NO APPEARANCE BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE           APPELLANTS

For the Respondent NO APPEARANCE BY OR ON BEHALF OF           RESPONDENT


 


MR JUSTICE MUMMERY: This is an appeal against the decision of the Industrial Tribunal held at Bedford on 13, 14 and 15 June 1994. The Tribunal unanimously decided that the Applicant, Mrs Catherine Blakeney had been unfairly dismissed. The Extended Reasons for the decision were sent to the parties on 28 June 1994. The Respondents to Mrs Blakeney's claim, Milton Keynes Community NHS Trust, served a Notice of Appeal dated 8 August 1994.

The Tribunal was informed by the solicitors for the NHS Trust that the case has been settled and they were instructed to seek leave to withdraw the appeal. In accordance with the usual practice of this Tribunal, the Registrar sent letters to Mrs Blakeney asking whether she would consent to the withdrawal of the appeal. This procedure is followed because, in some cases, there is no full consent to the withdrawal of the appeal, for example in cases where the Respondent has incurred legal costs. The Respondent may say that he only consents to the withdrawal of the appeal, if his costs of the appeal are paid. Such a letter seeking the information about Mrs Blakeney's position was sent on 26 January. Because there was no response, further letters were sent on 19 February and 15 March.

As there has been no response from Mrs Blakeney to any of those letters, this Tribunal has reached the conclusion that the appropriate course to follow is to grant leave to the NHS Trust to withdraw the appeal, on the basis that it has been settled. The consequence of granting leave to withdraw the appeal is that it is dismissed.