Skidmore v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust

[2001] EWCA Civ 870

Case details

Case citations
[2001] EWCA Civ 870
Court
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Judgment date
7 June 2001
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Civil procedure Employment Permission to appeal
Keywords
permission to appeal limited permission Employment Appeal Tribunal Health Circular procedural fairness real prospect of success
Outcome
permission to appeal granted on limited basis; permission refused on remaining grounds
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

An appellate court may grant permission to appeal on a limited basis where identified grounds are properly arguable and merit determination by the full court, particularly where they raise an important procedural issue with wider implications. Permission may be refused for other grounds that have no real prospect of success.

Factual background

The applicant sought permission to appeal from a judgment of the Employment Appeal Tribunal given by Judge Reid QC. The proposed appeal concerned, among other matters, the procedure required under an unidentified Health Circular and the fairness of earlier proceedings.

The Court of Appeal considered whether the procedural points warranted a full appeal and whether the separate fairness grounds had a real prospect of success.

Held

  1. Permission to appeal was granted on a limited basis. The court held that the submissions concerning paragraphs 49 to 53 of Judge Reid QC’s Employment Appeal Tribunal judgment raised properly arguable issues about the procedure to be adopted under the Health Circular.
  2. Those issues required argument before the full court. They had implications beyond the individual dispute and were important matters suitable for fuller exploration. Granting permission did not determine the merits or guarantee that the appeal would succeed.
  3. The court refused permission on the grounds alleging unfairness in the proceedings. Those grounds concerned Mrs Dean’s letter of 16 September 1997 and Mr Andrews’s memorandum to the Appeal Board after it had reserved its decision. The court was not satisfied that they had any real prospect of success.
  4. The appeal was confined to the procedural points concerning the Health Circular and the decisions of Mr Justice Bell, Mr Justice Garland and Mr Justice Lightman.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  • Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Permission to appeal from the Employment Appeal Tribunal was granted only on the procedural issues arising under the Health Circular. Permission was refused on the fairness grounds.
  • Employment Appeal Tribunal: Judgment given by Judge Reid QC. No citation is stated in the judgment.

Lower court decision

Judgment appealed:
Not stated in the judgment
Outcome:
permission to appeal granted on limited basis; permission refused on remaining grounds

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.