header-logo header-logo

16 October 2008
Issue: 7341 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-detail

Employment

Burmis v Governing Body of Aylesford School [2008] All ER (D) 28 (Oct)

(i) Rule 30(6) of the Employment Tribunal (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1861) requires a tribunal, having identified the issues in the case, to provide a succinct chronological statement of the facts found, explaining where necessary why factual conflicts in evidence have been resolved by the tribunal in the way that they have. There must be a concise statement of the law. Finally, the tribunal has to demonstrate its reasoning, applying the law to the facts as found, and explaining its conclusions on the issues raised.

(ii) While a delay of a year in promulgating an employment tribunal judgment ought never to happen (the maximum stipulated by the president of the employment tribunals is threeand- a-half months), the unusual feature of the instant case was the number of days the tribunal spent considering the matter. It was not a case where there had been a large gap in time between the tribunal’s deliberations and production of the judgment and reasons. In those circumstances, the mere fact of delay was not, of itself, a free-standing ground of appeal.

Issue: 7341 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , Employment
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll