Appeal No.	 EAT/201/99

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

	At the Tribunal
	On 9 June 1999

Before
HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER CLARK
MR A C BLYGHTON
MR P A L PARKER CBE

MRS D KIMBERLEY - LITTLE	APPELLANT

PUCCINOS LTD	RESPONDENTS

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING

Revised

	APPEARANCES

For the Appellant	MR BARKLEM
(of Counsel)
APPEARING UNDER THE 
EMPLOYMENT LAW APPEAL
ADVICE SCHEME
(ELAAS)

JUDGE PETER CLARK:	The Appellant , Mrs Kimberley–Little, commenced these proceedings, complaining of Unfair and Wrongful Dismissal by her former employer, Puccinos Ltd, by an Originating Application presented to the Ashford Employment Tribunal on 31st July 1998.

1	The case was listed for hearing before a Chairman, Mr G W Davis, sitting alone on 16th December 1998.  Neither party attended.  The Chairman promulgated a decision on 22nd December 1998, dismissing the Originating Application on the non-attendance of the Applicant.  By a letter dated 2nd January 1999, received by this Tribunal on 6th January, the Appellant wrote to the Registrar of the Employment Appeal Tribunal, in effect making application for a review of the Chairman’s decision on the grounds that she had been discharged from a Nursing Home having suffered injury some two days before the date fixed for the Tribunal hearing and as she puts it, she had forgotten about the Tribunal hearing in the trauma which she had suffered.

2	A copy of that letter was unfortunately not sent to the Employment Tribunal.  Had such a letter been sent, we are confident that it would have been treated as an Application for Review within time.  Instead, the Appellant followed that letter with a Notice of Appeal, dated 13th January 1999, to this Tribunal.  That Notice was received on 18th January.  

3	The appeal now comes before us today for a preliminary hearing.  At this hearing, the Appellant has been represented by Mr Barklem, under the ELAAS pro bono scheme, and Mr West, the Respondent’s representative has attended.  The upshot of the hearing this morning is that the Appellant seeks leave to withdraw her appeal.  We shall allow her to do so and consequently it will be formally dismissed.  However, Mr Barklem on her behalf, has invited us to direct the Registrar to send copies of the letter dated 2nd January and the Notice of Appeal dated 13th January 1999, to which we have referred, to the Employment Tribunal.  

4	It is, we understand, the Appellant’s intention to apply out of time for a review of the original decision dated 22nd December 1998.  Whether or not that application is permitted will, of course, be entirely a matter for the Tribunal Chairman.  But we make the observation that at the time when she wrote to the Employment Appeal Tribunal in January, the Appellant was not professionally represented.  Had she been represented, we have little doubt that she would have taken the review route, rather than the appeal route.