Employment Appeal Tribunal Article Index for
Employment
Website Links For
Employment
 

Information About

Employment Appeal Tribunal




The Tribunal may sit anywhere in Great Britain , although it is required to have an office in London .s. 20(2) Employment Tribunals Act 1996 Its current office is in Audit House, 58 Victoria Embankment, EC4Y 0DS, overlooking the river Thames .

Although it is a superior court of record, the Tribunal may not make a Declaration Of Incompatibility under the Human Rights Act 1998 .Whittaker v P & D Watson (t/a P and M Watson Haulage) {Link without Title} ICR 1244


MEMBERSHIP

There are two classes of members of the tribunal:
  • nominated members, who are appointed from English and Welsh Circuit Judges, Judges of the High Court and the Court Of Appeal as well as at least one Judge from the Court Of Session .s.22(1) Employment Tribunals Act 1996

  • appointed members, who must have special knowledge or experience of industrial relations either:

  • --- as representatives of employers

  • --- as representatives of workers


Members are nominated or appointed (as the case may be) by the Lord Chancellor . One of the nominated members is selected as President. The post is currently held by The Hon. Mr Justice Elias .


PROCEDURE


The EAT is governed by the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 (as amended in 1996, 2001, 2004 and 2005), and further by its Practice Direction . Parties are expected to understand and apply these rules.


JURISDICTION


The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) only has jurisdiction to allow appeals on points of law. Appeals on facts are only allowed in exceptional circumstances, on the ground that a tribunal decision was so perverse or defective that no reasonable tribunal could have arrived at that decision. A pervesity appeal will only succeed if the party overwhelmingly demonstrates that Employment Tribunal's decision was one which no reasonable tribunal, on a proper appreciation of the evidence and the law, would have reached (Yeboah v Crofton CA 2002 EWCA Civ 794) .


APPEALS FROM THE EAT

Where a party is dissatisfied with a decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal may apply to the tribunal requesting a Review of its own decision. The EAT may also review its decision of its own motion. Decisions can be reviewed where an error is relatively minor, eg a clerical error. Where a party believes the tribunal has misapplied the law or acted perversely, the review process is inappropriate and the party must appeal to the Court Of Appeal .

Weaver v NATFHE In the Weaver v NATFHE race discrimination case, an industrial tribunal decided that the union’s principal obligation in race harassment cases is to protect the tenure of the accused employee. A member of a trade union making a complaint of workplace harassment against a fellow employee and member of the same union was not entitled to union advice and assistance, irrespective of the merit of the case, because the employee complained against could lose his job. The Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the decision and extended the decision to cover complaints of sexist harassment.An application to the Court of Appeal confirmed the EAT's decision.

Parties are expected to comply with strictly enforced time limits when applying for a Review or Appeal.


HISTORY

The Employment Appeal Tribunal was created in 1975s. 87 Employment Protection Act 1975 as a successor to the National Industrial Relations Court , which had been abolished in 1974.

Weaver v NATFHE (now part of the UCU) In the Weaver v NATFHE race discrimination case, an industrial tribunal decided that the union’s principal obligation in race harassment cases is to protect the tenure of the accused employee. A member of a trade union making a complaint of workplace harassment against a fellow employee and member of the same union was not entitled to union advice and assistance, irrespective of the merit of the case, because the employee complained against could lose his job. The Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the decision and extended the decision to cover complaints of sexist harassment.An application to the Court of Appeal confirmed the EAT's decision. Also known as the Bournville College racial harassment issue


EXTERNAL LINK



REFERENCES