Hulse & Anor v E Hillier & Son (Engineering) Ltd & Anor [1995] UKEAT 273_94_1701 (17 January 1995)

Hulse & Anor v E Hillier & Son (Engineering) Ltd & Anor [1995] UKEAT 273_94_1701 (17 January 1995)

The Tribunal was entitled, on the evidence, to find that Mr Rogers was not taking part in industrial action. The construction of section 238 advanced by the appellants is incorrect; participation is a factual question, not a matter of deeming anyone not openly against the strike as a participant.

Citation
[1995] UKEAT 273_94_1701
Parties
Appellant: Mr Brian Hulse; Appellant: Mr Simon Lee; Respondent: E Hillier & Sons (Engineering) Plc; Respondent: Engineering Business Services Ltd; Respondent: Electronic Products Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
17 January 1995
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal Decision on Preliminary Point
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Industrial Action, Interpretation of Section 238 Trade Union & Labour Relations (consolidation) Act 1992
Employment Law Unfair Dismissal Industrial Action Interpretation of Section 238 Trade Union & Labour Relations (consolidation) Act 1992

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Brian Hulse

Appellant

Mr Simon Lee

Appellant

E Hillier & Sons (Engineering) Plc

Respondent

Engineering Business Services Ltd

Respondent

Electronic Products Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Industrial Tribunal Decision on Preliminary Point

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Industrial Tribunal erred in law in finding that Mr Rogers was not 'taking part' in industrial action for the purposes of section 238 of the Trade Union & Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was entitled, on the evidence, to find that Mr Rogers was not taking part in industrial action. The construction of section 238 advanced by the appellants is incorrect; participation is a factual question, not a matter of deeming anyone not openly against the strike as a participant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Leave to appeal refused