BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?

No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Olakotan v. Iqbal [2000] UKEAT 212_00_2106 (21 June 2000)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/212_00_2106.html
Cite as: [2000] UKEAT 212__2106, [2000] UKEAT 212_00_2106

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


BAILII case number: [2000] UKEAT 212_00_2106
Appeal No. EAT/212/00

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS
             At the Tribunal
             On 21 June 2000

Before

HIS HONOUR JUDGE D WILCOX

LORD DAVIES OF COITY CBE

MR I EZEKIEL



MRS JUILETTE OLAKOTAN APPELLANT

DR MANGAD IQBAL RESPONDENT


Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING

© Copyright 2000


    APPEARANCES

     

    For the Appellant MR A FALUYI
    (of Counsel)
    Instructed by: Tayo Arowojolu
    Solicitors
    Helen House
    214-218 High Road
    South Tottenham
    London N15 4NP
       


     

    JUDGE D WILCOX:

  1. The Appellant Mrs Juliette Olakotan was employed by the Respondent Doctor's practice. Suffice it to say that there were complaints made before the Tribunal relating to her absenteeism, so alleged to her hygiene and to other matters. But the principle matter that seems to have affected the mind of the employer, according to the finding of the Doctor employer was the fact that there was some deceit or 'pulling the wool over the eyes' of the Doctor employer in relation to her competence in following a qualification of degree course as a Practice Nurse. We accept the submission that this is a misconduct case and that, of course there should be care in finding facts relating to the misconduct.
  2. It is clear that the Doctor, upon what he regarded as the 'final deceit' placed great weight. Looking however at the reasoning and in particular in paragraph 9 of the decision, we find that we are in doubt as to what facts and matters were found by the Tribunal, in addition to the deceit that they find was practised, in relation to the degree course. We think this is a proper matter therefore to go a full Tribunal hearing.
  3. Insofar as there are complaints about the procedure, we do not think there are any valid complaint that could be sustained on appeal in relation to that. Therefore, it goes to the full hearing upon the limited basis of what I call the 'merits appeal.' It will last ½ a day, category C and a chronology please to be provided in addition. To that extent therefore, we give leave.


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2000/212_00_2106.html