[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Francis v British Broadcasting Corporation [1998] UKEAT 368_98_0105 (1 May 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/1998/368_98_0105.html Cite as: [1998] UKEAT 368_98_0105, [1998] UKEAT 368_98_105

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	THE APPELLANT IN PERSON


 


JUDGE LEVY QC: This is a sad appeal. Miss I D Francis had been employed permanently as a transport clerk by the BBC from 13th August 1990. Her employment ended on 24th May 1996 because she was dismissed by the BBC in these circumstances: She had taken a car for her own use over the week-end without going through proper procedures. The BBC, having investigated the matter, came to the decision that is was proper for her to be dismissed for this conduct. She brought a complaint to an Industrial tribunal claiming that her dismissal was unfair. That complaint was brought on 4th June 1996. The BBC put in a Notice of Appearance on 19th August 1996 setting out the facts as they saw them. Miss Francis' complaint was considered by an Industrial Tribunal sitting at London (North) on a date which is not immediate obvious from our papers, but the decision was sent to the parties on 15th January 1998. The unanimous decision of the Tribunal was that her dismissal was fair and her complaint therefore was dismissed.

Miss Francis appealed from the decision by Notice of Appeal on 17th January 1998. This is the ex parte of her appeal.

Miss Francis has made a moving address to us this morning saying how hard it was on her that in the circumstances she was dismissed. A Industrial Tribunal has to decide whether a decision by an employer to dismiss is one which a reasonable employer on the facts could have made. The Industrial Tribunal cannot interfere with the decision made by the employer if that was one a reasonable employer could have reached.

We are not allowed to interfere with the decision made an Industrial Tribunal unless the decision made by the Industrial Tribunal shows an error of law. We cannot see any error of law in the decision made by the Industrial Tribunal on the facts as we have briefly summarised them. Another employer may have acted differently from the BBC; another Industrial Tribunal may have reached a different conclusion from the Industrial Tribunal; but other employers and other tribunals may well have acted in the same way. In these circumstances, no point of law arises and there is nothing we can do on this appeal other than to dismiss it.