Employment

8 Kings Bench Walk v. Burton

[2002] UKEAT 472_01_0312Employment Appeal Tribunal2002

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Employment cases →

Get the AI brief for this case

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.

Quick orient — first passages from judgment

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL 58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS At the Tribunal On 3 December 2002 Before

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF CHAMBERS OF 8 KINGS BENCH WALK APPELLANT MR A N BURTON RESPONDENT

Upon hearing from Counsel for the Appellant and the Respondent, and upon the Appellant agreeing to pay the Respondent the sum of �19,497 (that sum comprising the payment of �15,000 compensation of �1,997 interest thereon, and the payment of �2,500 costs) within fourteen days of the sealed date of this Order, it is ordered by consent that this appeal be dismissed.

Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.

Full judgment transcript

BAILII · Verbatim mirror

Mr Berry, of Counsel, represents the Appellant, and Mr Willers, of Counsel, the Respondent to the Appeal. Both Counsel were the respective Counsel before the Employment Tribunal.

The position of the representatives in respect of the matters of appeal which are set out in the Notice of Appeal, were essentially set out before this Tribunal this morning, but during the adjournment, the representatives have, with commendable good sense, entered into discussions, the outcome of which is that they have asked this Tribunal to make an Order, the terms of which I will set out in one moment.

We have looked at the content of this, and we are able to say that we are content for the appeal to be withdrawn by consent on these terms, the practical effect of which is that the Employment Tribunal Decision stands, subject only to amendment as to quantum as agreed within the terms of the Order.

The formal Order is as follows:

That concludes these proceedings and we thank both Counsel for their assistance.

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

More Employment cases

Rashad v Cleveland Police

[2026] UKEAT 1

Alpha Anne and Ors v Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust

[2026] EAT 15

A v B, the Organisation & Ors

[2026] EAT 35

Prasad v Epsom and St Helier Hospital NHS Trust & Anor (Whistleblowing, Protected Disclosures, Race and Sex Discrimination, Victimisation)

[2026] UKEAT 22

Fullah v Medical Research Council & Ors (Victimisation)

[2026] UKEAT 28

H Fullah v Medical Research Council & Ors

[2026] EAT 28

Common Room

Discussion

0 comments · About the Common Room →

No comments yet — start the discussion.