Sterling Developments (London) Ltd v Pagano [2007] UKEAT 0511_06_0105 (1 May 2007)

Sterling Developments (London) Ltd v Pagano [2007] UKEAT 0511_06_0105 (1 May 2007)

The Employment Tribunal was properly constituted by a Chairman sitting alone as per statutory default for unlawful deductions claims, and no error of law or procedural irregularity occurred since no party objected at the hearing. The Chairman's finding on commission entitlement was not perverse and was supported by the evidence and contract interpretation.

Citation
[2007] UKEAT 0511_06_0105
Parties
Appellant/respondent Below: Sterling Developments; Respondent/claimant Below: Mr Pagano
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
01 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Liability Judgment of Employment Tribunal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unlawful Deductions From Wages, Employment Tribunal Procedure, Tribunal Constitution, Perversity, Bias and Procedural Irregularity
Employment Law Unlawful Deductions From Wages Employment Tribunal Procedure Tribunal Constitution Perversity Bias and Procedural Irregularity

Case Brief

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sterling Developments

Appellant/respondent Below

Mr Pagano

Respondent/claimant Below

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Against Liability Judgment of Employment Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal was improperly constituted by a Chairman sitting alone instead of a full Tribunal
  2. 2 Whether the Chairman's finding on commission entitlement was perverse

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal was properly constituted by a Chairman sitting alone as per statutory default for unlawful deductions claims, and no error of law or procedural irregularity occurred since no party objected at the hearing. The Chairman's finding on commission entitlement was not perverse and was supported by the evidence and contract interpretation.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Matter remitted for remedies and costs hearing before Mr Smail