10 Nov 2010
SCOTT WILLIAMS v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD
- Citation
- SCOTT WILLIAMS v. CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Case number
- HCLA24/2009
The appeal is allowed because the Deputy Presiding Officer erred in law and on evidence: there was no legal basis to imply a term into clause 6.2 that CPA must exhaust assessments before recruiting DEFO (such an implied term conflicts with express clause 7.2.c), paragraph 7.1 of the Ops Manual must be read subject to CPA's requirements, and the critical findings that claimant would have been ready, suitable and the next most senior suitable SO by Feb 2008 lacked necessary evidential foundation and proper methodology; accordingly the Tribunal's finding that claimant was eligible for bypass pay…