Eshak v Pinkerton Security Services [1997] UKEAT 499_95_3110 (31 October 1997)

Eshak v Pinkerton Security Services [1997] UKEAT 499_95_3110 (31 October 1997)

The appeal fails because the settlement agreement, freely entered into by Mr Eshak and Pinkerton Security Services, resolved all outstanding disputes, and the Tribunal's lack of jurisdiction over non-employer respondents is correct in law.

Citation
[1997] UKEAT 499_95_3110
Parties
Appellant: Mr Eshak; Respondent: Pinkerton Security Services; Respondent: Mr Godsave; Respondent: Mrs Y. Kamara; Respondent: Beresford & Co
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
31 October 1997
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Settlement Agreements, Tribunal Jurisdiction, Unfair Dismissal, Discrimination
Employment Law Settlement Agreements Tribunal Jurisdiction Unfair Dismissal Discrimination

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Eshak

Appellant

Pinkerton Security Services

Respondent

Mr Godsave

Respondent

Mrs Y. Kamara

Respondent

Beresford & Co

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the settlement agreement precludes further proceedings by Mr Eshak against Pinkerton Security Services
  2. 2 Whether the Industrial Tribunal had jurisdiction over claims against Mr Godsave, Mrs Kamara, and Beresford & Co

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal fails because the settlement agreement, freely entered into by Mr Eshak and Pinkerton Security Services, resolved all outstanding disputes, and the Tribunal's lack of jurisdiction over non-employer respondents is correct in law.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No arguable point of law; appeals dismissed.