[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Employment Appeal Tribunal >> Lisk-Carew v Birmingham City Council & Anor [2002] UKEAT 0779_02_1112 (11 December 2002) URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2002/0779_02_1112.html Cite as: [2002] UKEAT 779_2_1112, [2002] UKEAT 0779_02_1112

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

APPEARANCES

 

For the Appellant	MR K BRYANT Appearing under the Employment Law Appeal Advice Scheme


 


MR JUSTICE ELIAS

1. In this Preliminary Hearing we have had the benefit of Mr Bryant making submissions on behalf of Mr Lisk-Carew as part of the ELAAS Scheme. He has got to the heart of this case if we may say so in identifying the one point in issue in it which is suitable to go for a full appeal.
2. It is not necessary to set out any details. It suffices to say that Mr Lisk-Carew was employed for some ten years or so by the Birmingham City Council. He has taken, over the course of the last few years, a series of claims of race discrimination and other matters and in all but one of these claims failed. The claim that succeeded was a claim that he had been dismissed by reason of victimisation because of the earlier actions that he had taken.
3. In that same decision that held he had been so victimised the Employment Tribunal also found that he had been fairly dismissed. When it came to the question of Remedies, they awarded £5,000.00 for injury to feelings but held that since the dismissal had been fair they would have awarded no compensation for future loss.
4. Initially the thrust of the complaint of Mr Lisk-Carew was that the £5,000.00 injury to feelings was far too small. We are satisfied that there had no prospect of success for reasons given by the Tribunal and that is not now being challenged. What Mr Bryant says on behalf of Mr Lisk-Carew is that having found that the dismissal was by reason of victimisation, it is at least arguable that the Tribunal should have gone on to consider the possibility of future loss.
5. There is arguably some contradiction between the finding of fair dismissal and the finding of victimisation. We are satisfied that on this point, but this point only, there is a matter fit to go to the full hearing but we make it plain that in our view there is no basis for challenging the award of £5,000.00 for injury to feelings. Category C.