Hamm v Wear Valley District Council [1997] UKEAT 1109_96_0502 (5 February 1997)

Hamm v Wear Valley District Council [1997] UKEAT 1109_96_0502 (5 February 1997)

The appeal raises no arguable point of law because the Tribunal was not required to give reasons for refusing an adjournment, the witnesses' evidence was not relevant, and the error regarding nationality on the application form was immaterial to the outcome.

Citation
[1997] UKEAT 1109_96_0502
Parties
Appellant: Mr Hamm; Respondent: Newcastle Council
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
05 February 1997
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Racial Discrimination, Adjournment of Hearing, Bias, Procedural Fairness
Employment Law Discrimination Law Racial Discrimination Adjournment of Hearing Bias Procedural Fairness

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Hamm

Appellant

Newcastle Council

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal to adjourn the hearing was an error of law
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal's failure to give reasons for refusing adjournment was unlawful
  3. 3 Whether there was potential bias by the Tribunal

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal raises no arguable point of law because the Tribunal was not required to give reasons for refusing an adjournment, the witnesses' evidence was not relevant, and the error regarding nationality on the application form was immaterial to the outcome.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed