2
EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Second Floor, Fleetbank House 2-6 Salisbury Square, London, EC4Y 8JX Telephone : 020 7273 1061 Facsimile : 020 7273 1045 www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/tribunals/employment-appeals/ Our Reference: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA Mr Douglas Iain Gardiner 5 Weavern Court Chippenham Wilts SN14 0LU E-mail & Post 06 June 2013 Dear Sir Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd I am writing with reference to your Notice of Appeal in the above case from the Decision of an Employment Tribunal sitting at Bristol and promulgated on 21 January 2013. Under Section 21 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996, this Appeal Tribunal only has jurisdiction to hear appeals from Employment Tribunal Decisions on questions of law, i.e. where it is argued that the Tribunal made some mistake in its interpretation or application of the law in reaching its decision. This means that it is not the function of this Appeal Tribunal to re-hear the facts of a case or to review an Employment Tribunal’s decision on those facts. The appeal has been referred to His Honour Judge Peter Clark in accordance with Rule 3(7) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 (as amended) and in his opinion your Notice of Appeal discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the appeal. He states: It is a cardinal rule of law that claims between the same parties, once finally determined, cannot be relitigated. The principle of finality of litigation applies. The present claims are based on the Appellant’s employment with the Respondent which ended with his resignation effective on 28 May 2011. He then brought various claims in the Bristol ET which were dismissed by an ET chaired by Employment Judge Owen in September 2011. Now he wishes to revive those claims in these proceedings, adding further claims which could and should have been raised in the original proceedings. That is not permissible. Employment Judge Harper was right to strike them out. For the above reasons the learned Judge considers that this Appeal has no reasonable prospect of success and that, in accordance with Rule 3(7), no further action will be taken on it.

Judgment EAT judge peter clark

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Judgment EAT judge peter clark

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Second Floor, Fleetbank House 2-6 Salisbury Square, London, EC4Y 8JX Telephone : 020 7273 1061 Facsimile : 020 7273 1045

www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/tribunals/employment-appeals/

Our Reference: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA

Mr Douglas Iain Gardiner 5 Weavern Court Chippenham Wilts SN14 0LU E-mail & Post 06 June 2013 Dear Sir

Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd I am writing with reference to your Notice of Appeal in the above case from the Decision of an Employment Tribunal sitting at Bristol and promulgated on 21 January 2013. Under Section 21 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996, this Appeal Tribunal only has jurisdiction to hear appeals from Employment Tribunal Decisions on questions of law, i.e. where it is argued that the Tribunal made some mistake in its interpretation or application of the law in reaching its decision. This means that it is not the function of this Appeal Tribunal to re-hear the facts of a case or to review an Employment Tribunal’s decision on those facts. The appeal has been referred to His Honour Judge Peter Clark in accordance with Rule 3(7) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 (as amended) and in his opinion your Notice of Appeal discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the appeal. He states:

It is a cardinal rule of law that claims between the same parties, once finally determined, cannot be relitigated. The principle of finality of litigation applies. The present claims are based on the Appellant’s employment with the Respondent which ended with his resignation effective on 28 May 2011. He then brought various claims in the Bristol ET which were dismissed by an ET chaired by Employment Judge Owen in September 2011. Now he wishes to revive those claims in these proceedings, adding further claims which could and should have been raised in the original proceedings. That is not permissible. Employment Judge Harper was right to strike them out. For the above reasons the learned Judge considers that this Appeal has no reasonable prospect of success and that, in accordance with Rule 3(7), no further action will be taken on it.

Page 2: Judgment EAT judge peter clark

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Second Floor, Fleetbank House 2-6 Salisbury Square, London, EC4Y 8JX Telephone : 020 7273 1061 Facsimile : 020 7273 1045

www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/tribunals/employment-appeals/

Your attention is drawn to Rules 3(8) and 3(10) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules. A copy of Rule 3 is enclosed with this letter. Yours faithfully Ms J Johnson Deputy Registrar CC: Peninsula Business Services Ltd for the Respondent (Ref: Mr Neil Clowrey) Bristol Employment Tribunal (ref: 1401745/12,1401756/12 & 1401811/12)