Hayes & Ors v Transco Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 1261 (17 September 2003)

Hayes & Ors v Transco Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 1261 (17 September 2003)

The trial judge's refusal to admit relevant evidence from the defendant and the severe restriction of cross-examination without notice amounted to a serious procedural irregularity, rendering the decision unjust and necessitating a new trial.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 1261
Parties
Claimant/respondent: MJ Hayes; Claimant/respondent: RT McDonald; Claimant/respondent: Alan Jeffrey Brown (Personal Representative of JL Hayes); Defendant/appellant: Transco Plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 September 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal From County Court (employment/contract) / Appeal Judgment With Order for New Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed; new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
Contractual Terms in Employment, Disturbance Allowance, Procedural Fairness, Case Management, Cross Examination Limits
Employment Law Civil Procedure Contractual Terms in Employment Disturbance Allowance Procedural Fairness Case Management Cross Examination Limits

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MJ Hayes

Claimant/respondent

RT McDonald

Claimant/respondent

Alan Jeffrey Brown (Personal Representative of JL Hayes)

Claimant/respondent

Transco Plc

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal From County Court (employment/contract) / Appeal Judgment With Order for New Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section O of the 1993 agreement remained part of the claimants' contracts after 1995 changes
  2. 2 Whether claimants retained a 'normal depot' after 1995
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge's limitation of cross-examination and exclusion of evidence amounted to serious procedural irregularity

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's refusal to admit relevant evidence from the defendant and the severe restriction of cross-examination without notice amounted to a serious procedural irregularity, rendering the decision unjust and necessitating a new trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; new trial ordered.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed on grounds of serious procedural irregularity.
  • Order for new trial.