Corporate and Business Law Assignment 2012

Table of Contents Introduction2 Proceedings2 The demo3 Precedents mountain by tourist courts6 Conclusion6 Corporate & product line Law Introduction An Employment Tribunal would hear claims regarding matters to do with practice. These could accept unfair fire, discrimination and redundancy payments. An employment tribunal is similar to a address besides it is non as formal and it must solve independently. These ar commonly open to the public. Employment tribunals atomic number 18 independent discriminative bodies who help determine disputes between employees and employers ab give away their employment rights.The tribunal I chose to view and write this report on is an employment tribunal, that involved the claimant displace forward a end of unfair judgment of dismissal and breach of accept that was ground on the bureau that she tangle she was below the belt laid-off turn carrying push through her duties that were set to her by her employer (Dr Monoghon). * Les s formal than other(a) court proceedings. * Lower costs. * Benefit of tribunal is they can choose to represent themselves. * coiffe members specialise in their atomic number 18a of expertise regarding the case.Below are lucubrate of the claimant, suspect, meter, time and venue. The Case Unfair Dismissal and breach of contract Venue Croydon Tribunals appointee 13th November 2012 Time 1000am 1600pm Defendant Dr Hester Monoghan Claimant Ms Davidson prove 8 minutes Audio transcription laterward Ms Davidson was push aside from her job, she later(a)r received a call from the nanny agency that she was crop for, stating that they had been informed by the patrol that of an allegation of sister abuse by herself on the children.She was because refused to be represented by the agency as they did non requisite to put forward her name as it would mull badly on the agency as she had a case on liberation against her. This prevented her from finding work and indeed was out(a ) of work for a period of five months. Ms Davidson opened this case up against the suspect as she feels she unfairly dismissed and had a bad reputation in regards to her occupation. She at that placefore wanted to be reimbursed for the loss of the work she missed out on and also wanted to see the light her name regarding this unloose.Proceedings Upon entering the tribunal room, the try was seated front centred facing both parties involved in the case, the parties involved were Miss Davidson the claimant, her representative Peter Mathews, seated next to her and collimate to her on the left hand side were the respondents Dr Monoghan and Mr Monoghan. Once entered the resolve introduced her and consequently allowed the defendant and claimant a chance to introduce themselves, preceded by giving defendant an opportunity to provide a brief history of the events which had taken place.Dr Monoghan ge tell that the claimant had not been fulfilling her duties properly and was in breach of the employment contract as it had go in to the Monoghans precaution that she was using foul words in front of her children, which the children had picked up and started to use whilst in the home environment. Dr and Mr Monoghan did not approve of this and believed that the claimant had been lying about pickings her kids to activities and used to allege she did in the diary that had been prescribed to the claimant.For this debate she felt she had to take the line in to her own hand and therefore had her husband put in place voice recording measures in an open plan kitchen/living/dining room. On 8th shew 2012 they make an eight hour recording of Ms Davidsons sky at her house. This was broken in to segments totalling a twenty minute recroding. After listening to the audio recording they felt that they had reasonable grounds to believe that Miss Davidson was verbally abusive and showed a lack of empathy and lovingness towards her children.The evidence The stress then gave Dr Monoghan a chance to turn of events the evidence that had been produced but Mr Monoghan then intervened and then asked the judge Is it not against privacy right to play a recording in a public tribunal. The judge then referred to a ruling book and then she do a judgment that it would be allowed as she felt it corresponded to the guidelines of the tribunal proceedings. Mr Monoghan then frame-up the audio to show the recording that was made on the 8th evidence 2012 whilst his children were in care of Ms Davidson.I felt this expression was used for the fact that it was a public viewing and Mr Monoghan felt it was a sensitive situation as it involved his children of a minor age which could be seen as a private matter to him and his family as he would not want his kids further involved in this situation. The audio recording was of snippets of dinner time while the children were in care of Ms Davidson. The children were not paying attention to what Ms Davidson was telling them to do a nd therefore this was frustrating her.Her mannerism towards the children then indicated that she was persistent for the children eating their fare also indicating threatening behaviour indicated the description by if you dont eat your food the trolls are going get you. There were words used such as Go away Shut up Can you just eat your food Stop it There was a constant rudeness to the children passim this recording. The manlike child was especially picked on by Ms Davidson as she would ordain to him You, stop being bossy to your sister During the recording there was a clear sharpness to Ms Davidsons voice towards the children and there was a continuity of abusive behaviour towards the children. call into question of Dr. Monoghan Once this audio recording was finished the judge then asked the defendant, Dr Monoghan, to come up on the see to it stand. Dr Monoghan was then asked to read out the Oath of Truth in court. The judge then began to ask her questions to break it down a nd try and work out really what happened.Talking about the judgment clashing in January defendant explained that she had elevated the fact that the children had been using inappropriate verbiage to her and her husband such has unsympathetic up and thats tough. She then went on to say that she had highlighted this to Ms Davidson and asked her to restrain from using these words in front of them as felt it would get hold of a negative impact on their upbringing. She also asked Ms Davidson to focus on the male child as she felt her birth with the female child was a good one. To this Ms Davidson replied by saw that the male child was the most difficult child she has ever looked after.To this the defendant replied that this meeting had been set up simply to raise their concerns but were accustomed no reassurance by Ms Davidson stating that these problems would be sorted. They informed her of the fact that they had a recording and asked her if she would like to hear it but Ms David son said she could not do this as she had a job query to go to as she was going to become redundant within the next month and Mr Monoghan had been made redundant from his job and was therefore going to take control of the child care himself. Dr.Monoghan then stated they both left the room and resolute between themselves that they were not happy for the claimant to continue her job and therefore dismissed her there and then. Questioning of Mr Monoghan Mr Monoghan stated that he raised concerns and for this reason he was not happy for Miss Davidson to continue looking after his children as he was concerned about the safety of his children. He then stated that he offered to play the recording to Ms Davidson but she refused as she had an interview to attend as she was coming to the end of a contract.This was out-of-pocket to Mr Monoghan graceful redundant from his job and therefore taking control of his childrens wellbeing. Questioning of Ms Davidson Ms Davidson confirmed that the t ranscript of the meeting was correct. She then went on to say that she felt that she was not prepared for the meeting and felt as if she had the right to extradite an independent witness with her. She then went on to say that she had only said Shut up to the children once and it was unfortunate that she had been caught out on that one instance.She did admit to wrongfully doing by using this give voice towards the children. She was angered with the fact that she was told it was a reference and holi daylight pay meeting but turned out to be her last day of work. The final exam verdict The judge felt that as Ms Davidson had been out of work for ternary months due to the allegations that were made to the police that she should be compensated three months wages. The judge then ordered the defendants to pay Ms Davidson for the two weeks abide by that she should bring had.She dismissed any allegations of MS Davidson physically abusing the children as there was no evidence found and ad vised the defendants to go through the police if they dummy up felt this was a serious retort and also added that no further action would be taken within the tribunal system. motion of tribunal proceedings Speed Although the defendant arrived one hour late it still allowed the case to be completed within five hours.From the case I visited I soon realised there was a in truth productive speed passim. The case I visited was scheduled for 1 day but was wrapped up within 5 hours and that included a 1 hour lunch, evidence, questioning and the judgment to take place. . There was not much waiting around and the whole case was to the point as through Expertise The judge who was appointed to the case for unfair dismissal was a specialist in this area she specialised in.Off the record the judge mentioned to us that this particular case was a difficult one as it involved one employee and one employer which meant she was dealing with a delicate situation. This was due to it involving childr en of a minor age and there had clearly been strong relationship between the family and Ms Davidson as it was previously stated in the appraisal meeting which clearly documented Ms Davidson as having a loving and caring relationship with her children.The judge began by introducing herself and unfortunately she did not boast anyone else a ache with her judging the case so. There was an instance when Mr Monoghan raised an issue of the audio recording being heard while we were present as it children of a minor age talking on it throughout and after consulting a book for a few minutes she then came to a decision that it would not be a problem for this to be vie out load while the public was present. Accessibility There are different mediums in which the claimant can use to put forward a case.The most commonly one used is usually the ET1 form, requiring the claimant to state the details of the case which they wish to put forward outlining the circumstances and any other issues regardin g the case. However there are other formalities that can be used such as contacting the authorities through email or telephone. The accessibility of the case falls upon the representative to send through the relevant forms in order for the case to be reviewed and considered for a tribunal hearing. faithfulness From what I witnessed at the tribunal case I felt that Dr.Monoghan and Mr Monoghan were unfairly judged by the judge as by the evidence that was heard it was clear to see that Miss Davidson was clearly not exercising her job expeditiously enough as she was clearly heard using foul wording in front of the children and I do believe she should of controlled her temper as this is what she was trained to do. I felt she Miss Davidson won the case establish technicality as she was able to say she wasnt directing her language towards the children and as of this was able to bypass the system and win the case.The judge should have shown more compassion towards Dr. Monoghan and Mr Mono ghan as it was a case that applied to their children and therefor was a sensitive one for them as it could affect the children on the long term. Precedents set by tribunals The lower tribunals are not there to set binding precedents for any other court or even themselves. They are bound by the decisions of superior courts and appellate tribunals.Appellate and Employment appeal tribunals are bound by the decisions that are made by the Supreme tribunal but they would usually be required to being bound to the decisions that they made themselves (English legal systems, Richard Ward and Amanda Akhtar 11th edition). In regards to employment appeal tribunals, matters of right are binding on decisions of appeals and the House of Lords, although decisions of the high court in England and wales would usually have a great persuasiveness and the ribunals would similarly go with the principles that can be found in those decisions. There are true precedents rules and guidelines that have been set out by previous legal cases and these have to be followed by tribunals. This allows there to be more of efficiency throughout the case as the defendants can refer back to the case that is in conjunction with the case however within the judicial system of a tribunal court there is a leniency and flexibility based on the case this was as well as the evidence and schooling provided by both parties.Taking this information into consideration the laments will then argue and make their decisions. Similar cases may have different outcomes which will not be based on the same precedents. Tribunals such as an employment based cases are required to follow certain procedures and take in to consideration such as reasons for dismissal with the notice given for dismissal and other externalities that are relevant to the case for dismissal. Main issueThe main issue with tribunals setting binding precedents for other courts and themselves is that in tribunals there is a grit of flexibility in t heir operations and the judges and the courts use their interpretation of the situation to make a judgement and it would be optimistic to think that the tenet of the binding precedents achieves the certainty and flexibility. Conclusion The judgement of the case went in favour of the claimant in the tribunal.I feel this is an unfair judgement as the parents had intrusted the claimant in taking care of their children in an appropriate manner but it was clear throughout the audio that was played that was not applied by the claimant and there was a constant rudeness and aggressiveness towards the children. I feel that as the claimant would have been a trained with the necessary skills to look after the children she should have still been able to detach her emotions from her actual duties towards the children as she is trained in this profession. quote http//terryandco. hubpages. com/hub/Advantages-and-Disadvantages-of-Administration-Tribunals