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!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Pendragon Motor Group Ltd (t/a Stratstone (Wilmslow) Ltd) v. Ridge [2000] UKEAT 962_00_1110 (11 October 2000)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/962_00_1110.html
Cite as: [2000] UKEAT 962_00_1110, [2000] UKEAT 962__1110

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


BAILII case number: [2000] UKEAT 962_00_1110
Appeal No. EAT/962/00

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 11 October 2000

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE J R REID QC

MR A D TUFFIN CBE

MISS S M WILSON



PENDRAGON MOTOR GROUP LTD
T/A STRATSTONE (WILMSLOW) LTD

APPELLANT

MR A K RIDGE RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING – EX PARTE

© Copyright 2000


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellants MR I WRIGHT
    (of Counsel)
    Retail Motor Industry Federation
    Legal Services Department
    201 Great Portland Street
    London
    W1N 6AB
       


     

    JUDGE REID QC: This is an ex parte preliminary hearing of an appeal by Pendragon Motor Group Ltd against the refusal of an Employment Tribunal, sitting in Manchester, which on 10th July 2000 determined that the appellant, the respondent below, should not be allowed to adduce in evidence a video recording of the applicant. That video recording was allegedly taken six months after the date of the dismissal, the applicant having claimed that he was dismissed in circumstances which gave rise to a disability discrimination complaint.

  1. For present purposes, I think, it suffices us to say that three reasons are given by the tribunal in paragraph 6 of the reasons, paragraph 6(iv) merely being a summary.
  2. The decision of the tribunal not to admit this evidence for those reasons does, in our view, give rise to a point of law and that the matter should proceed to a full hearing. Beyond that and, in the circumstances of the case, we think the less said about the merits or otherwise of this attempt to introduce edited video footage the better.
  3. We will therefore direct that the matter goes to a full hearing. The case to be listed for ½ a day, Category C.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/962_00_1110.html