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 >> Hilaire & Ors v Holiday Dyes & Chemicals Ltd [1999] UKEAT 1315_98_0902 (9 February 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1999/1315_98_0902.html Cite as: [1999] UKEAT 1315_98_902, [1999] UKEAT 1315_98_0902 |
||
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
| At the Tribunal | |
Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE CHARLES
MR L D COWAN
LORD GLADWIN OF CLEE CBE JP
| APPELLANT | |
| RESPONDENT |
Transcript of Proceedings
JUDGMENT
PRELIMINARY HEARING
| For the Appellants | MR T LINDEN (of Counsel) Messrs Pattinson & Brewer Solicitors 30 Great James Street London WC1N 3HA |
MR JUSTICE CHARLES: The parties to this appeal are Marcus St Hilaire and 72 others (the Appellants) and Holiday Dyes & Chemicals Ltd, (the Respondent).
The issue before the Tribunal related to the construction of an agreement, a point made on the appeal is that the Tribunal took the wrong approach to construction.
In our judgment that is plainly arguable having regard to the approach conveniently set out in Chitty, 27th Edition, paragraphs 12-102 to 105 and 111 and we would add that those passages in the textbook have been the subject of recent explanation by the House of Lords, particularly Lord Hoffmann in two cases: Mannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Life Assurance Co Ltd [1997] AC 749 and in the Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society [1998] 1 WLR 896, the issue being as to construction it is one of law and in our judgment it is reasonably arguable that the Tribunal took the wrong approach and therefore this appeal should proceed.
