AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Es-B.R.S. Employee's ,Case Fails

25th October 1957
Page 36
Page 36, 25th October 1957 — Es-B.R.S. Employee's ,Case Fails
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

AN order prohibiting Birmingham Compensation Appeal Tribunal from hearing an appeal by Mr. Henry Percy Leigh, of Cheadle Road, Forsbrook, Stoke-on-Trent, arising from the termination of his employment by _British Road Services, was granted by three judges in the Queen's Bench Divisional Court last week,

Mr. Leigh did not appear to. oppose the application for the order, which was made by the British Transport Commission, Giving judgment, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Goddard, said the Tribunal was set up under the Transport Act, 1953. It provided that people who lost their jobs with the British Road Services should receive compensation, either resettlement compensation while they sought other, work, or Icing-term compensation if the person had served for eight years.,

Mr. Mr. Leigh joined B.R.S. in 1950 and his service was terminated in 1957, so it was obvious 2be had not been employed for eight years, He was given resettlement compensation, but then gave notice that he would go to the Tribunal to claim that his dismissal was wrongful because it violated a "last in. first out" agreement with his union.

Lord Goddard said: "That is not a matter in which the Tribunal can rule. If Mr. Leigh has a case that he has been wrongfully dismissed, and I can see difficulties in that, he would have to proceed by a law action."

It was perfectly clear that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear a claim for wrongful dismissal and they would be prohibited from hearing the appeal. 'Mr, Justice Donovan and Mr. Justice Havers agreed.


comments powered by Disqus