Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
The Claimant had applied to adjourn the hearing on the ground that he was not fit to conduct the proceedings properly and was unable to obtain representation without an adjournment.� The Tribunal refused the application.� Held: the Tribunal did not err in law and the Tribunal�s decision did not render the hearing unfair.�
This is an appeal by Dr Claudius D�Silva (�the Claimant�) against a judgment of the Employment Tribunal sitting in Manchester (Employment Judge O�Hara presiding) dated 2 April 2009.� By its judgment the Tribunal dismissed the Claimant�s claim against Manchester Metropolitan University (�the Respondent�).
This hearing is concerned with the question whether the Employment Tribunal erred in law in refusing to adjourn the hearing which led to the judgment.� The Claimant had applied to adjourn the hearing on the ground that he was not fit to conduct the proceedings properly and was unable to obtain representation without an adjournment.
At a preliminary hearing of this appeal, where the Claimant was represented by Mr Michael Duggan under the Employment Law Appeal Advice Scheme, the Appeal Tribunal identified that the Claimant�s case on this question was arguable, and granted permission to amend the Notice of Appeal, which now states the grounds of appeal succinctly.� The Claimant�s Notice of Appeal originally set out other grounds.� These were dismissed at the preliminary hearing; and the Claimant�s application for permission to appeal against that decision was dismissed by Rimer LJ on 1 February 2011.
On 1 September 1993 the Claimant, who is black and of Indian ethnic origin, commenced employment with the Respondent as a senior lecturer in the Chemistry Department.� Between 2002 and 2004 he brought five separate claims to the Employment Tribunal.� The first was compromised; the others were consolidated and listed for a 4 week hearing commencing on 18 April 2005, over which Employment Judge O�Hara (as she now is) presided.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.