Monatano's appeal

[rosa]

Physician heal thyself is far too appropriate than I would like.

You sure you're not a doctor? Cos that makes as much sense as the stuff I have to decipher in casenotes every day.

Edited January 8, 2014 by rosa

[rudemedic]

You sure you're not a doctor? Cos that makes as much sense as the stuff I have to decipher in caseloads every day.

Lol. Yeah I'm sure.

[leeslover]

No only qualified Judges (and their deputies) are referred to as Judges in ET cases, lawyers are known as the chair. Lots and lots of Employment cases go beyond ET, some even start in the High Court, and their decisions are applicable to ET cases, otherwise, ET transcripts wouldn't run into the 20 pages that most do. It is all a series of precendets, a European ruling has precendence over a Supreme Court ruling, which in turn has precendence over a decision made in the House of Lords, which has precendence over a decision made in the Court of Appeal, which has precedence made over a decision made in the High Court and a Employment Appeal Tribunal, and they have precedence made over a decision made in an ET.

As to where I get this from, it's how I've been earning money for the past 2 years.

Bloody hell. ET rules on the facts of a case. How the :censored: does that set a precedent for another case? Any attempt to do so should be struck out at pre hearing. Wish they'd got me in to hear Monty's case now

[celliott83]

forgive me if this has been mentioned already but I thought the decision was made alongside the release of his rape charge coming out too?

 

Isnt he in court in March this year for it?

[rudemedic]

.

forgive me if this has been mentioned already but I thought the decision was made alongside the release of his rape charge coming out too?

 

Isnt he in court in March this year for it?

The club released a statement saying that the rape allegation against Montano had no bearing on their decision to dismiss him. Edited January 8, 2014 by rudemedic

[real]

If a Judge decides something in one case, then that is applied to other cases, statute is open to interpretation, Judges interpretation is then allowed to be used in similar circumstances for other cases. Furthermore statute is not going to be all encompassing and so the grey areas are often interpreted by Judges and their decision effectively becomes statute in similar incidents.

ETs don't always have Judges on them, but beyond ETs, in Employment Appeals Tribunals, Court of Appeal etc. there is usually Judge or Judges.

 

I understand how case law is used in general, but in ET cases, statute provides basic protections, which might be contravened by employment contracts, in which case statute would over-ride the contract, but how often would there then be an additional requirement to interpret statute? It just seems a bit unlikely.

In other cases the contract may enhanced statutory requirements, and the ruling would be based on the contract terms, therefore the potential for case-law is very limited.

Additionally I don't see how a disrepute dismissal based on a statement with reliable evidence, could then be considered to prejudice any trial on a criminal matter with a different form of transgression and different burden of proof. Also, wouldn't a charge being brought carry a little more weight that a decision by a manager in a small/medium enterprise, in terms of influencing an outcome?