Hussain v. Addaction & Anor [2001] UKEAT 0755_00_2310 (23 October 2001)
The Employment Tribunal's Rule 7 deposit order is appealable, and the reasons given suffice for appeal. The Tribunal's decision was not perverse, as it was reasonable for the Chairman to conclude Mr Hussain had no reasonable prospect of success based on the evidence and circumstances. Remission is precluded on proportionality grounds; the appeal is dismissed.
- Citation
- [2001] UKEAT 0755_00_2310
- Parties
- Appellant: Mr Hussain; 1st Respondent: Addaction; 2nd Respondent: Leicestershire Constabulary
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 23 October 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Employment Appeal / Full Hearing
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Disability Discrimination, Appealability of Tribunal Orders, Rule 7 Deposit, Perversity
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mr Hussain
Appellant
Addaction
1st Respondent
Leicestershire Constabulary
2nd Respondent
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Full Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Is an Employment Tribunal's Rule 7 deposit order appealable?
- 2 Was the Employment Tribunal's decision requiring a deposit perverse?
Ratio Decidendi
The Employment Tribunal's Rule 7 deposit order is appealable, and the reasons given suffice for appeal. The Tribunal's decision was not perverse, as it was reasonable for the Chairman to conclude Mr Hussain had no reasonable prospect of success based on the evidence and circumstances. Remission is precluded on proportionality grounds; the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed; no remission to Employment Tribunal; existing deposit order stands.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment