eat core bundle rule 3(10) hearing

ANY APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEAL SHOULD BE MADE AT THE HEARING. ANY APPLICATIONS NOT MADE AT THE HEARING MUST BE MADE TO THE COURT OF APPEAL DIRECT.

UKEATPA/0386/13/LA Date of Hearing: Wednesday 18 December 2013

INDEX TO BUNDLE The hearing of a Rule 3(10) application

Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd Index Page

1. ET decision issued 21/1/13 .............................................................. 1-7

2. Grounds of Appeal ........................................................................... 8-13

3. EAT Form1 ...................................................................................... 14

4. ET1 1401745/2012 .......................................................................... 15-21

5. EAT Form1 ...................................................................................... 22-23

6. ET1 4109312/2012 .......................................................................... 24-30

7. ET3 4109312/2012 .......................................................................... 31-40

8. EAT Form1 ...................................................................................... 41

9. ET1 1401756/2012 .......................................................................... 42-48

10. EAT Form1 ...................................................................................... 49

11. ET1 1401811/2012 .......................................................................... 50-57

12. EAT Form1 ...................................................................................... 58

13. ET1 1401812/2012 .......................................................................... 59-66

14. Letter ET/parties dated 31/10/12 ..................................................... 67

15. Appellant’s application for review to ET ........................................... 68-72

16. Letter ET/Appellant dated 5/12/12 ................................................... 73-74

17. Letter ET/Appellant dated 23/1/13 ................................................... 75


19. Letter ET/Appellant dated 5/2/13 ..................................................... 77-78



ANY APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEAL SHOULD BE MADE AT THE HEARING. ANY APPLICATIONS NOT MADE AT THE HEARING MUST BE MADE TO THE COURT OF APPEAL DIRECT.

22. Letter EAT/Appellant dated 06/06/13 ............................................... 81-82

23. E-mail Appellant /EAT 23/7/13 ......................................................... 83

24. E-mail Appellant/EAT 29/7/13 @11:12 ............................................ 84-85

25. E-mail Appellant/EAT 29/7/13 @14:56 ............................................ 86-87

26. E-mail EAT/Appellant 2/8/13 ............................................................ 88

27. E-mail Appellant/EAT 2/8/13 ............................................................ 89-90

28. EAT Order seal dated 20-8-13 ......................................................... 91-92

29. E-mail Appellant/EAT 28/10/13 ........................................................ 93-94

30. Letter EAT/Appellant dated 30/10/13 ............................................... 95

31. E-mail Appellant/EAT 21/11/13 ........................................................ 96-98

32. Letter EAT/Appellant dated 25/11/13 ............................................... 99

7) The grounds of appeal are attached to this Notice.

1. The facts. 2. The claimant was a salaried employee of Exsto Uk Ltd (The company)

formerly Dunlaw Engineering after a delayed return to work due to wild cat strikes abroad, his employment ended on the 9th of December 2010 at 10:00-10:30am when he was taken aback by the criticism of his line manager he became unfit for work

3. The claimant due to the induced episode of stress, depression and anxiety remains unfit for work

4. The line manager was Mr Baxevanidis (JB) 5. The Director of the company was Mr Torres (CT) 6. For several years the company was a client employer of Peninsular

Business Services (PBS) who provided outsourced, human resource management, health and safety advice to the client.

From the case: Peninsula Business Services Ltd v. Rees & Ors [2011] UKEAT 0407_10_2104 (21 April 2011)

Which under paragraph 7 “The Facts” listed the resources of PBS

• PBS is a well known provider of employment law consultancy, advice and

advocacy. It is run by a Board comprising the Managing Director, Mr Peter Done (who is also a shareholder); Director of Consulting, Mr Anthony Sutcliffe, and Finance Director, Mr Keith Hayward. Mr Sutcliffe has an Assistant Director, Mr Kieron Hill, who is not at Board level.

• PBS is a substantial organisation, based in Manchester. The Advocacy

Department itself employed some 57 employees of whom about 31 were advocates including trainee advocates; about 17 of these were home-based rather than based in Manchester, with some based in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

• PBS employed some 500 employees and had the fullest possible resources

and administrative support systems.

• PBS had some 18,000 client employers under three or five year contracts.

Other than where clients came because they already had Tribunal proceedings against them, Peninsular Business Services provided an insurance indemnity scheme whereby if the client employer followed its advice and guidance in respect of employees, PBS associated insurer would indemnify the client against any award sustained as a result of an Employment Tribunal claim. Accordingly, both to advise and guide the client employer but also to protect its own insurer's funds,

• PBS provided to client employers detailed written guidance to be followed in

respect of many employment areas ………. • That advice included its own documents…."

7. The claimant had been paid a fixed salary by the company for seven years without deduction or variation for sickness or overtime.

8. For five years 2004-2009 the claimant had had multiple operations and

hospitalisation for treatment for a complex perianal fistula, during this period despite the wording of the contract of employment the claimant had remained on full pay and worked from home for long periods, the claimant quite properly informed his employers of his poor health and how it affected his day to day activities. A reasonable request for additional holiday instead of a pay rise was refused.

9. The claimant was refused the reasonable adjustments of pay and working from home when he had complained that he felt he had been bullied by the company and had suffered personal injury from an industrial accident.

10. The associated medical records were refused at the hearing as evidence

by the Owen tribunal.

11. There was judgment for the respondents in September 2011 by the

Owen Tribunal

Where the claimant was found to be

I. Depressed but not disabled,

II. Lying and yet at the same time honest.

III. Taken aback by criticism but un-bullied.

IV. To have deliberately absented himself.

V. Guilty of gross misconduct.

VI. This judgment is subject to appeal. 11. The claimant is recognised as disabled under the equality act by the

secretary of state for the purposes of claiming ESA. 12. In May 2012 a large abscess reoccurred in the perineum requiring

hospitalisation and more surgery. 13. The claimant has had a claim for an industrial accident date 09/12/2012 at

10-10.30 hrs accepted by the secretary of state

The question of law.

11. Does the claimant’s depressive episode lasting for over two years meet the definition of a disability under the Equality Act 2010?

12. Does the claimant’s complex perianal abscess meet the definition of a disability or past disability under the Equality Act 2010?

13. Does disability recognised by the secretary of state that was not accepted by the tribunal entitle the claimant to refuse Judgement of the employment tribunal?

14. Does the industrial injury and accident recognised by the secretary of state that was not recognised by the tribunal entitle the claimant to refuse Judgement of the employment tribunal?

15. With case management and correct application of the overriding objective does an unrepresented party have to present a prima facia case?

16. Should PBS have known the claimant is disabled under the Equality Act 2010?

17. Should PBS ensure the client employer knows that a claimant is likely to be disabled under the Equality Act 2010?

18. Does PBS owe a duty of care to client employer employee’s to ensure all contractual documents are up to date?

19. Does the 24hr help line of PBS provide unilateral variations to the contracts of the client employer employee’s without exception?

20. Does an employer that subcontracts HR management to PBS effectively transfer employee contracts to PBS?

21. Does transferring HR to PBS effectively make employer clients employee’s, employee’s of PBS thus invalidating any client employer employee contracts?

22. Does the 24hr advice line entitle a client employer to change their story to suit – in other words apply unilateral variations?

The claimant managed to secure the earliest flight home in accordance with European law The claimant left what was at face value an appropriate message

23. Does an employee have to repeatedly call an unreceptive employer to report an absence?

24. Does being trapped in foreign airspace by industrial action meet the definition of gross misconduct or breach of contract?

25. Do the repeated pleadings and refusal by an unrepresented claimant to

accept a tribunal judgment found on incorrect facts meet the definition of an appeal?

26. Does an employment tribunal have the power to hear an appeal of its

own Judgment?

27. Do the repeated pleadings and refusal by an unrepresented claimant to accept a tribunal judgment found on incorrect facts meet the definition of a serial litigant?

28. Do the repeated pleadings and refusal by an unrepresented claimant to accept a tribunal judgment found on incorrect facts meet the definition of an abuse of process?

29. Do the repeated pleadings and refusal by an unrepresented claimant to accept a tribunal judgment found on incorrect facts meet the definition of vexatious action?

30. Does an unrepresented party have to be competent to present a case under the Henderson v Henderson rule?

31. Does an unrepresented party’s physical or mental competence define the competence of a court?

32. Does an employment tribunal that hears the case of an unrepresented party meet the definition of a court of competence?

33. Does a pre-hearing review equal a case management discussion?

34. Does a regional employment judge have the power to reverse or review

the decision of an employment judge?

35. Does the employment tribunal have the power to award compensation for industrial injury?

36. Does the employment tribunal owe a duty of care to discuss the case

management notes submitted by a claimant?

THIS LIST IS NOT EXHAUSTED

ï Ç±«® ¼»¬¿·´

ïòï Ì·¬´»æ Ó® Ó® Ó· Ó Ñ¬¸»®

ïòî Ú·®¬ ²¿³» ø±® ²¿³»÷æ

ïòí Í«®²¿³» ±® º¿³·´§ ²¿³»æ

ïòì Ü¿¬» ±º ¾·®¬¸ ø¼¿¬»ñ³±²¬¸ñ§»¿®÷æ ß®» §±«æ ³¿´»á º»³¿´»á

ïòë ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

ïòê Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»

ø©¸»®» ©» ½¿² ½±²¬¿½¬ §±« ·² ¬¸» ¼¿§ ¬·³»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ

ïòé Ø±© ©±«´¼ §±« °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ §±«áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ

îòï Ù·ª» ¬¸» ²¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®» ½´¿·³·²¹¿¹¿·²¬ò

îòî ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

îòí ×º §±« ©±®µ»¼ ¿¬ ¿ ¼·ºº»®»²¬¿¼¼®» º®±³ ¬¸» ±²» §±« ¸¿ª»¹·ª»² ¿¬ îòîô °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸»º«´´ ¿¼¼®» ¿²¼ °±¬½±¼»ò

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

×º ¬¸»®» ¿®» ±¬¸»® ®»°±²¼»²¬ °´»¿» ½±³°´»¬» Í»½¬·±² ïïò

Ü Ü Ó Ó Ç Ç Ç Çó ó

î Î»°±²¼»²¬� ¼»¬¿·´

à

ÛÌï ªðí ððï ÛÌï ªðí ððïï

ì

Ü±«¹´¿ ×¿·²

Ù¿®¼·²»®

ðîñðïñïçêë ì

ë

É»¿ª»®² Ý±«®¬

Ý¸·°°»²¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïì ðÔË

ðïîìçêëíðèï

ðéçéíïéîìðë

ì

¼±«¹ò¹¿®¼·²»®à¬·½¿´·ò½±ò«µ

Ó® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· øÓ¿²¿¹»® Û¨¬± ËÕ÷

Û¨¬± ËÕ Ô¬¼

êé

Î±«²¼°±²¼

Ó»´µ¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïî èÛÞ

ðïîìçéðííîç

íòï Ð´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ·º °±·¾´»ò

É¸»² ¼·¼ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬¿®¬á

× §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ½±²¬·²«·²¹á Ç» Ò±

×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ ½»¿»¼ô ±® §±« ¿®» ·²

¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»ô ©¸»² ¼·¼ ·¬ô ±® ©·´´ ·¬ô »²¼á

íòî Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¶±¾ §±« ¼± ±® ¼·¼ò

ìòï Ø±© ³¿²§ ¸±«® ±² ¿ª»®¿¹» ¼±ô ±® ¼·¼ô §±« ©±®µ »¿½¸ ©»»µá ¸±«® »¿½¸ ©»»µ

ìòî Ø±© ³«½¸ ¿®»ô ±® ©»®»ô §±« °¿·¼á

Ð¿§ ¾»º±®» ¬¿¨ } ô òðð

Ò±®³¿´ ¬¿µ»ó¸±³» °¿§ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ } ô òðð

±ª»®¬·³»ô ½±³³··±²ô ¾±²«» ¿²¼ ± ±²÷

ìòí ×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ »²¼»¼ô ¼·¼ §±« ©±®µ

ø±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®÷ ¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»áÇ» Ò±

×º �Ç»�ô ¸±© ³¿²§ ©»»µ� ±® ³±²¬¸� ²±¬·½»

¼·¼ §±« ©±®µô ±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®á ©»»µ ³±²¬¸

ìòì É»®» §±« ·² §±«® »³°´±§»®� °»²·±² ½¸»³»á Ç» Ò±

Ð´»¿» ¿²©»® ìòë ¬± ìòç ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ô ±® °¿®¬ ±º ·¬ô · ¿¾±«¬ «²º¿·® ±® ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´ò

ìòë ×º §±« ®»½»·ª»¼ ¿²§ ±¬¸»® ¾»²»º·¬ô »ò¹ò ½±³°¿²§ ½¿®ô ³»¼·½¿´ ·²«®¿²½»ô »¬½ô º®±³ §±«®

»³°´±§»®ô °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¼»¬¿·´ò

ìòê Í·²½» ´»¿ª·²¹ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ª» §±« ¹±¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾á

×º �Ò±�ô °´»¿» ²±© ¹± ¬®¿·¹¸¬ ¬± »½¬·±² ìòçòÇ» Ò±

ìòé Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸»² §±« ¬¿®¬»¼ ø±® ©·´´ ¬¿®¬÷ ©±®µò



í Û³°´±§³»²¬ ¼»¬¿·´

Ø±«®´§

É»»µ´§

Ó±²¬¸´§

Ç»¿®´§

ì Û¿®²·²¹ ¿²¼ ¾»²»º·¬

ÛÌï ªðí ððî ÛÌï ªðí ððîî

ïèñðèñîððí

ì

Ü»·¹² Ó¿²¿¹»®

íéòë

íðçð

îîçíì

ì

ì

í ©»»µ ½±³°¿²§ ·½µ °¿§

ì

Ë²µ²±©²

ìòè Ð´»¿» ¿§ ¸±© ³«½¸ §±« ¿®» ²±© »¿®²·²¹ ø±® ©·´´ »¿®²÷ò } ô òðð »¿½¸

ìòç Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¬± ¿§ ©¸¿¬ §±« ©¿²¬ ·º §±«® ½¿» · «½½»º«´æ

¿ Ì± ¹»¬ §±«® ±´¼ ¶±¾ ¾¿½µ ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»·²¬¿¬»³»²¬÷

¾ Ì± ¹»¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¿³» »³°´±§»® ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»ó»²¹¿¹»³»²¬÷

½ Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ±²´§

ëòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²» ±® ³±®» ±º ¬¸» ¾±¨» ¾»´±©ò ×² ¬¸» °¿½» °®±ª·¼»¼ô ¼»½®·¾» ¬¸» »ª»²¬ô

±® »®·» ±º »ª»²¬ô ¬¸¿¬ ¸¿ª» ½¿«»¼ §±« ¬± ³¿µ» ¬¸· ½´¿·³æ

¿ × ©¿ «²º¿·®´§ ¼·³·»¼ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´÷

¾ × ©¿ ¼·½®·³·²¿¬»¼ ¿¹¿·²¬ ±² ¬¸» ¹®±«²¼ ±º

½ × ¿³ ½´¿·³·²¹ ¿ ®»¼«²¼¿²½§ °¿§³»²¬

¼ × ¿³ ±©»¼

» Ñ¬¸»® ½±³°´¿·²¬

ëòî Ð´»¿» »¬ ±«¬ ¬¸» ¾¿½µ¹®±«²¼ ¿²¼ ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ·² ¬¸» °¿½» ¾»´±©ò

Ì¸» ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ¸±«´¼ ·²½´«¼» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ©¸»² ¬¸» »ª»²¬ø÷ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹

¿¾±«¬ ¸¿°°»²»¼å º±® »¨¿³°´»ô ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ ®»´¿¬» ¬± ¼·½®·³·²¿¬·±² ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¿´´

¬¸» ·²½·¼»²¬ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹ ¿¾±«¬ô ±® ¿¬ ´»¿¬ ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ´¿¬ ·²½·¼»²¬ò ×º §±«®

½±³°´¿·²¬ · ¿¾±«¬ °¿§³»²¬ §±« ¿®» ±©»¼ °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» °»®·±¼ ½±ª»®»¼ò

Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ë Ç±«® ½´¿·³

²±¬·½» °¿§

¸±´·¼¿§ °¿§

¿®®»¿® ±º °¿§

±¬¸»® °¿§³»²¬

Í»¨ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ »¯«¿´ °¿§÷

Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

Í»¨«¿´ ±®·»²¬¿¬·±²

Î¿½»

Î»´·¹·±² ±® ¾»´·»º

ß¹»

ÛÌï ªðí ððí ÛÌï ªðí ððíí

ð

ì

ì

ì

ì

ï÷ ×¬ · ³§ Ö«¼¹³»²¬ ¿²¼ ¬¸»®»º±®» ¾»´·»º ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸» ½´¿·³¿²¬ ©¿ ¾«´´·»¼ô ¸¿®¿»¼ ¿²¼ ª·½¬·³·»¼ ¾§ Û¨¬± ËÕ

ß Ò¿¬·±²¿´·¬·½ ¹®±«° ±º Ú®»²½¸³»² ¸»¿¼»¼ ¾§ ¿ Ù®»»µ ¿© ¬± ·¬ ¬¸¿¬ ²± Û³°´±§»» ±º Þ®·¬·¸ ²¿¬·±²¿´·¬§®»³¿·²»¼ »³°´±§»¼ ¿¬ ¬¸»·® ËÕ ±ºº·½»ò Ñ®·¹·²¿´´§ ¬¸»®» ¸¿¼ ¾»»² íð »³°´±§»»ò

Í¿¬ ì¬¸ Ü»½»³¾»® îðïð × ©¿ ¬®¿°°»¼ ·² Í°¿·² ¾§ ·²¼«¬®·¿´ ¿½¬·±² ¿²¼ ¾±±µ»¼ ¬¸» ²»¨¬ ¿ª¿·´¿¾´» ®»¬«®² º´·¹¸¬øè¬¸ Ü»½÷ ¿²¼ ®»°±®¬ ¬¸» ·²½·¼»²¬ Ê·²½»²¬ Þ»¦¿®¼ øÚ®»²½¸÷ ©¸± ®»´¿§»¼ ¬¸» ³»¿¹» ±²¬± ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ±ºÛ¨¬± «µ ±² Ó±²¼¿§ ê¬¸ Ü»½»³¾»®Ó±²ò ê¬¸ Ü»½ Ì¸» ³¿²¿¹»® Ó® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· øÙ®»»µ÷ ©¸± ½±²¬¿²¬´§ ®»º»®®»¼ ¬± ¸·³»´º þ¿ ¬¸» ¾±þ ±ºÛ¨¬± «µ ¬¿®¬»¼ ¿² «²®»¿±²¿¾´» ·²ª»¬·¹¿¬·±² ·²¬± ³§ ¿¾»²½» ©·¬¸±«¬ ½±²¬¿½¬·²¹ ³»Ì¸· ©¿ ²»¿® ¬± ¬¸» º·²¿´ ¬®¿© ·² »®·» ±º ¾«´´§·²¹ ¿½¬·±² ¾§ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·Ì¸» ½±³°¿²§ º¿·´»¼ «²¼»® ¬¸» ØÍÛ ß½¬ ïçéì ¬± °®±ª·¼» ¿ ¿º» ©±®µ·²¹ »²ª·®±²³»²¬Ð®»ª·±« ·²½·¼»²¬ ±º ¾«´´§·²¹ ¾§ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ú Ó® Ì±®®»ï÷ Ð»®ª»®·±² ±º ¬¸» ½±«®» ±º ¶«¬·½» ·² îððé ¬¸» ½±³°¿²§ ½±ª»®»¼ «° ¿ °»»¼·²¹ ·²½·¼»²¬ ·²ª±´ª·²¹ Ó®Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ó ¬¸· ©±«´¼ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ÑÕ ·º ¸» ¸¿¼ ²±¬ ¾®¿¹¹»¼ ´±«¼´§ ¿²¼ ±°»²´§ ·² ¬¸» ±ºº·½» ¿¾±«¬ ¸· ¿½¬·±²ò

ì

ëòí ×º §±«® ½´¿·³ ½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¿®» ³¿µ·²¹ ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®»

«²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê ø±¬¸»®©·» µ²±©² ¿ ¿ �©¸·¬´»¾´±©·²¹� ½´¿·³÷ô

°´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¾»´±© ·º §±« ©·¸ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸· º±®³ô ±® ·²º±®³¿¬·±² º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¾»

º±®©¿®¼»¼ ±² §±«® ¾»¸¿´º ¬± ¿ ®»´»ª¿²¬ ®»¹«´¿¬±® øµ²±©² ¿ ¿ �°®»½®·¾»¼ °»®±²� «²¼»® ¬¸»

®»´»ª¿²¬ ´»¹·´¿¬·±²÷ ¾§ ¬¸» Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½»ò

êòï Ý±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¬¸· »½¬·±² · ±°¬·±²¿´ô ¾«¬ ³¿§ ¸»´° ·º §±« ¬¿¬» ©¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±®

®»³»¼§ §±« ¿®» »»µ·²¹ º®±³ §±«® »³°´±§»® ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ ±º ¬¸· ½±³°´¿·²¬ò ×º §±« °»½·º§

¿² ¿³±«²¬ô °´»¿» »¨°´¿·² ¸±© §±« ¸¿ª» ½¿´½«´¿¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ º·¹«®»ò

éòï Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¿ ½±ª»®·²¹ ´»¬¬»® ©·¬¸ ¬¸· º±®³ò Ç±« ¸±«´¼ ¿¼¼ ¿²§ »¨¬®¿ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²

§±« ©¿²¬ « ¬± µ²±© ¸»®»ò Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ê É¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±® ®»³»¼§ ¿®» §±« »»µ·²¹á

é Ñ¬¸»® ·²º±®³¿¬·±²

ÛÌï ªðí ððì ÛÌï ªðí ððìì

î÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ®»¹«´¿®´§ ·²¹´»¼ ±«¬ ·²¼·ª·¼«¿´ º±® »¨½»·ª» ¾´¿³» º±® ½±³°¿²§ º¿·´«®»í÷ Ñ² ±²» ±½½¿·±² ·² ¿ ³»»¬·²¹ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ±°»²´§ ¸«³·´·¿¬»¼ Ó® Ô»©· ±®¼»®·²¹ ¸·³ ¬± °»®º±®³ ¿²·´´»¹¿´ ¿½¬ ¬± ©¸·½¸ Ó® Ô»©· ®»°´·»¼ ¿´³±¬ ·² ¬»¿® þ× ½¿²²±¬ ¼± ¬¸¿¬ Ö±¸² × ©±«´¼ ´±±» ³§ ¬¿¬« ¿ ¿½¸¿®¬»®»¼ ¿½½±«²¬¿²¬þ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ®»°´·»¼ ½±´¼´§ þÖ±¸²ô §±« ¼± ¿ × ¿§ô × ¿³ ¬¸» ¾±þ Ó® Ô»©· ´»º¬ ¬¸»³»»¬·²¹ ·² ¹®»¿¬ ¼·¬®»ò Ó® Ô»©· ©¿ º®»¯«»²¬´§ ¿®¹«·²¹ ©·¬¸ Ó® Þ ·² ¬¸» ³¿²²»®òì÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ½±²¬¿²¬´§ «»¼ ¬¸» ©±®¼ ¿½µ ±® ¿½µ»¼ ·²¹´·²¹ ±«¬ Í¬»°¸¿²» Ð»®½¸» ±º Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½» ·²¸· ¿¾»²½» º±® ³«½¸ ±º ¸· ª»²±³ë÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ³¿§ ¸¿ª» ¼»º®¿«¼»¼ ¬¸» ·²´¿²¼ ®»ª»²«» ±º ¬¿¨»ê÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· °»²¬ ³±¬ ±º ¸· ¬·³» ½´±»¼ ·² ¸· ±ºº·½» ©¸»®» ¸» µ»°¬ ¿ ´¿®¹» ¼±¹ ©¸·½¸ ¾¿®µ»¼ ¿¬¿²§¾±¼§ ©¸± ©»²¬ ·² ¬¸»®»é÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ½±²¬¿²¬´§ ½®·¬·½·»¼ ¬¸» Ë²·¬»¼ µ·²¹¼±³ ¿²¼ ·¬ °»±°´»è÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ¬¿¬»¼ þ× ½¿² ¿½µ §±« ¿´´ ©¸»²»ª»® × ´·µ»ô ©·¬¸±«¬ ½¿´´·²¹ ¿²§¾±¼§ ·²þ

Ì¸» ½´¿·³¿²¬ ³¿²¿¹» ¬± ¼»¿´ ©·¬¸ ¬¸· ±«¬®¿¹»±« ¾»¸¿ª·±® ¾«¬ ·² ¬¸» »²¼ «½½«³¾»¼ ¬± ¬¸» º«´´ ©®¿¬¸ ±º Ó®Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·· ·³°®±°»® ¿¬¬»²¬·±²ò

Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¬¸· ½´¿·³ ¬± Þ®·¬±´ Û³°´±§³»²¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´

ì

Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ïë §»¿® ±º ´± ±º ¿´¿®§ ïë ¨ }íêôððð ã }ëìðôððð

Ì¸» Ö«¼·½·¿®§ ±º Þ®·¬±´ º¿·´»¼ ¬± ®»¿½¸ ¿ Ö«¼¹³»²¬ ¿²§ ®»¿±²¿¾´» °»®±² ½±«´¼ ®»¿½¸ò Ì¸»§ º¿·´»¼ ¾§ ¬¸»·®±©² ¿¼³··±² ·² ©®·¬¬»² ½±®®»°±²¼»²½» ¬± «²¼»®¬¿²¼ ¬¸» ½´¿·³¿²¬ò Ë²©·´´·²¹´§ ¾«¬ ·² ¬¸» »¿®½¸ ±º Ö«¬·½»¬¸» ½´¿·³¿²¬ ¸¿ ¬¿®¬»¼ ¬¸» «¾³··±² ±º ÛÌïù ·² ¾·¬» ·¦»¼ °·»½» ± ¸» ½¿² »¨°®» ¸·³»´º ¿ ¸» ©·¸»òÌ¸»» ¿®» ²±¬ ¬¸» ¿½¬·±² ±º ¿ ª»¨¿¬·±« ´·¬·¹¿²¬ ¿¾«·²¹ ¬¸» §¬»³ ¿ º¿·´·²¹ §¬»³ ¸¿ ¿¾«»¼ ¬¸» ½´¿·³¿²¬òÌ¸· ½±®®»°±²¼»²½» »²¼»¼ ±² ¬¸» îðñðèñîðïî ± ¬¸· ¿°°´·½¿¬·±² · ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» í ³±²¬¸ °»®·±¼

Ð´»¿» º·´´ ·² ¬¸· »½¬·±² ±²´§ ·º §±« ¸¿ª» ¿°°±·²¬»¼ ¿ ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»ò ×º §±« ¼± º·´´ ·² ¬¸·

»½¬·±²ô ©» ©·´´ ·² º«¬«®» ±²´§ »²¼ ½±®®»°±²¼»²½» ¬± §±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª» ¿²¼ ²±¬ ¬± §±«ò

èòï Î»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»� ²¿³»æ

èòî Ò¿³» ±º ¬¸» ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»�

±®¹¿²·¿¬·±²æ

èòí ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

èòì Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ

èòë Î»º»®»²½»æ

èòê Ø±© ©±«´¼ ¬¸»§ °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ ¬¸»³áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ

ïðòï Ì± §±«® µ²±©´»¼¹»ô · §±«® ½´¿·³ ±²» ±º ¿ ²«³¾»® ±º ½´¿·³ ¿¹¿·²¬ Ç» Ò±¬¸» ¿³» »³°´±§»® ¿®··²¹ º®±³ ¬¸» ¿³»ô ±® ·³·´¿®ô ½·®½«³¬¿²½»á

è Ç±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»

à

ç Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

çòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ ·º §±« ½±²·¼»® §±« ¸¿ª» ¿ ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ Ç»Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¬¸· ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ · ¿²¼ ¬»´´ « ©¸¿¬ ¿·¬¿²½»ô ·º ¿²§ô §±« ©·´´ ²»»¼ ¿

§±«® ½´¿·³ °®±¹®»» ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» §¬»³ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ º±® ¿²§ ¸»¿®·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ ³¿§ ²»»¼

¬± ¾» ¸»´¼ ¿¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½» °®»³·»ò

ïð Ó«´¬·°´» ½¿»

ÛÌï ªðí ððë ÛÌï ªðí ððëë

ì

Ý«®®»²¬ ¼·¿¾·´·¬·»ô ´·¬·¹¿¬·±² ¬®»ô ©±®µ ®»´¿¬»¼ ¬®»ô ¼»°®»·±² ¿²¼ ¿²¨·»¬§ò ß Ø·¿¬« ¸»®²·¿ô Ð¿¬¼·¿¾·´·¬·»ô ¿ ½±³°´»¨ °»®·ó¿²¿´ º·¬«´¿ ½±³³»²½»¼ ·² îððìóîððç ®»¯«·®·²¹ ¸±°·¬¿´·¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ë ±°»®¿¬·±²òÐ»®·ó¿²¿´ ¿¾½» ¸±°·¬¿´·»¼ ¿²¼ ±°»®¿¬»¼ ±² ·² Ó¿§óîðïîò ß´´ ±º ©¸·½¸ ¸¿ª» ¸¿¼ ±® ©·´´ ¸¿ª» ¿ ·¹²·º·½¿²¬¿²¼ «¾¬¿²¬·¿´ »ºº»½¬ «°±² ³§ ¼¿§ ¬± ¼¿§ ¿½¬·ª·¬·»òÍ°»½·¿´ ²»»¼ô ¬± ½±³³«²·½¿¬»ô ±® ¾» °®»»²¬ ¿¬ ¸»¿®·²¹ ±²´§ ¾§ »ó³¿·´ ±® ¬»´»°¸±²»ò É·´´ ²±¬ ¾» ¿¾´» ¬±¿²©»® ¿²§ ±®¿´ ¯«»¬·±² ¾«¬ ©·´´ ¹·ª» ½±²·¼»®»¼ ¿²©»® ¾§ ·² ©®·¬·²¹ ¾§ »ó³¿·´ò

ì

Ð´»¿» ®»¿¼ ¬¸» º±®³ ¿²¼ ½¸»½µ §±« ¸¿ª» »²¬»®»¼ ¿´´ ¬¸» ®»´»ª¿²¬ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²ò

Ñ²½» §±« ¿®» ¿¬·º·»¼ô °´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ò

Ü¿¬¿ Ð®±¬»½¬·±² ß½¬ ïççèò É» ©·´´ »²¼ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸· º±®³ ¬± ¬¸» ®»°±²¼»²¬ø÷ ¿²¼ ß½¿ò É» ©·´´ô ·º §±«® ½´¿·³

½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¸¿ª» ³¿¼» ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®» «²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê

ø¿²¼ §±« ¸¿ª» ¹·ª»² §±«® ½±²»²¬ ¬¸¿¬ ©» ¸±«´¼ ¼± ±÷ »²¼ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ô ±® »¨¬®¿½¬ º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¬¸» ®»´»ª¿²¬

®»¹«´¿¬±®ò É» ©·´´ °«¬ ¬¸» ·²º±®³¿¬·±² §±« ¹·ª» « ±² ¬¸· º±®³ ±²¬± ¿ ½±³°«¬»®ò Ì¸· ¸»´° « ¬± ³±²·¬±® °®±¹®»

¿²¼ °®±¼«½» ¬¿¬·¬·½ò ×²º±®³¿¬·±² °®±ª·¼»¼ ±² ¬¸· º±®³ · °¿»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ º±® Þ«·²»ô ×²²±ª¿¬·±² ¿²¼

Íµ·´´ ¬± ¿·¬ ®»»¿®½¸ ·²¬± ¬¸» «» ¿²¼ »ºº»½¬·ª»²» ±º »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬®·¾«²¿´ò

ïï Ü»¬¿·´ ±º ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ Î»°±²¼»²¬

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

ÛÌï ªðí ððê ÛÌï ªðí ððêê

Ó® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®» øÝÛÑ÷

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

ì

ß¼¼®» ±ºæ

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»ëë ßª»²«» Ü» Ô¿ Ü»°±®¬¿¬·±²Î±³¿²ô Ý»¼»¨Ú®¿²½»ô ÞÐîèð îêïðêÌ»´»°¸±²» õíí ì éë éî éî éîÚ¿¨ õíí ì éë éð çî ðé

EAT1 Notice of Appeal from Decision of Employment Tribunal

1) The appellant Mr Douglas Iain Gardiner 2) Any communication relating to this appeal may be sent to the appellant at

e-mail: [email protected] phone: 07973172405

3) The appellant appeals from the Bristol Employment Tribunal Case No 1401745/2012 Heard 8th January 2013 Before Judge Harper Judgment date 21rd January 2013

4) The parties to the proceedings before the employment tribunal, other than the appellant, were 1st Respondent EXSTO UK LTD 67 Roundponds, Melksham, Wiltshire 2nd Respondent Mr. J BAXEVANIDIS 3rd Respondent Mr J M PENELON

5) Copies of— (a) The written record of the employment tribunal’s judgment, and the written reasons of the employment tribunal; (b) The claim (ET1); (c) - are attached to this notice.

6) Copies of— (a) The review application; (b) N/A (c) The written reasons of the employment tribunal in respect of that review application; are attached to this Notice. 7) The grounds of appeal are attached to this Notice.

mailto:[email protected]




3) The appellant appeals from the Aberdeen Employment Tribunal Case No 4109312/2012 Heard - Before - Judgment date -

4) The parties to the proceedings before the employment tribunal, other than the appellant, were 1st Respondent EXSTO UK LTD 21 CARDEN PLACE, ABERDEEN AB10 1UQ 2nd Respondent Mr. C Torres 5) Copies of— (a) The written record of the employment tribunal’s judgment, and the written reasons of the employment tribunal; (b) The claim (ET1) (c) Response (ET3) are attached to this notice.







4) The parties to the proceedings before the employment tribunal, other than the appellant, were 1st Respondent EXSTO UK LTD 21 CARDEN PLACE, ABERDEEN AB10 1UQ 2nd Respondent Mr. C Torres 5) Copies of— (a) The written record of the employment tribunal’s judgment, and the written reasons of the employment tribunal; (b) The claim (ET1) (c) Response (ET3) are attached to this notice.



ï Ç±«® ¼»¬¿·´

ïòï Ì·¬´»æ Ó® Ó® Ó· Ó Ñ¬¸»®

ïòî Ú·®¬ ²¿³» ø±® ²¿³»÷æ

ïòí Í«®²¿³» ±® º¿³·´§ ²¿³»æ

ïòì Ü¿¬» ±º ¾·®¬¸ ø¼¿¬»ñ³±²¬¸ñ§»¿®÷æ ß®» §±«æ ³¿´»á º»³¿´»á

ïòë ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

ïòê Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»

ø©¸»®» ©» ½¿² ½±²¬¿½¬ §±« ·² ¬¸» ¼¿§ ¬·³»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ

ïòé Ø±© ©±«´¼ §±« °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ §±«áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ

îòï Ù·ª» ¬¸» ²¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®» ½´¿·³·²¹¿¹¿·²¬ò

îòî ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ


Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

×º ¬¸»®» ¿®» ±¬¸»® ®»°±²¼»²¬ °´»¿» ½±³°´»¬» Í»½¬·±² ïïò


î Î»°±²¼»²¬� ¼»¬¿·´

à


ì

Ü±«¹´¿ ×¿·²

Ù¿®¼·²»®


ë

É»¿ª»®² Ý±«®¬

Ý¸·°°»²¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïì ðÔË



ì

¼±«¹ò¹¿®¼·²»®à¬·½¿´·ò½±ò«µ

Ó® Ý Û Ì±®®»

Û¨¬± ËÕ Ô¬¼

îï

ÝßÎÜÛÒ ÐÔßÝÛô Ú×ÎÍÌ ÚÔÑÑÎ

ßÞÛÎÜÛÛÒ

ßÞÛÎÜÛÛÒÍØ×ÎÛ

ßÞïð ïËÏ

íòï Ð´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ·º °±·¾´»ò

É¸»² ¼·¼ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬¿®¬á

× §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ½±²¬·²«·²¹á Ç» Ò±

×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ ½»¿»¼ô ±® §±« ¿®» ·²

¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»ô ©¸»² ¼·¼ ·¬ô ±® ©·´´ ·¬ô »²¼á

íòî Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¶±¾ §±« ¼± ±® ¼·¼ò

ìòï Ø±© ³¿²§ ¸±«® ±² ¿ª»®¿¹» ¼±ô ±® ¼·¼ô §±« ©±®µ »¿½¸ ©»»µá ¸±«® »¿½¸ ©»»µ

ìòî Ø±© ³«½¸ ¿®»ô ±® ©»®»ô §±« °¿·¼á

Ð¿§ ¾»º±®» ¬¿¨ } ô òðð

Ò±®³¿´ ¬¿µ»ó¸±³» °¿§ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ } ô òðð

±ª»®¬·³»ô ½±³³··±²ô ¾±²«» ¿²¼ ± ±²÷

ìòí ×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ »²¼»¼ô ¼·¼ §±« ©±®µ

ø±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®÷ ¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»áÇ» Ò±

×º �Ç»�ô ¸±© ³¿²§ ©»»µ� ±® ³±²¬¸� ²±¬·½»

¼·¼ §±« ©±®µô ±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®á ©»»µ ³±²¬¸

ìòì É»®» §±« ·² §±«® »³°´±§»®� °»²·±² ½¸»³»á Ç» Ò±

Ð´»¿» ¿²©»® ìòë ¬± ìòç ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ô ±® °¿®¬ ±º ·¬ô · ¿¾±«¬ «²º¿·® ±® ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´ò

ìòë ×º §±« ®»½»·ª»¼ ¿²§ ±¬¸»® ¾»²»º·¬ô »ò¹ò ½±³°¿²§ ½¿®ô ³»¼·½¿´ ·²«®¿²½»ô »¬½ô º®±³ §±«®

»³°´±§»®ô °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¼»¬¿·´ò

ìòê Í·²½» ´»¿ª·²¹ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ª» §±« ¹±¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾á

×º �Ò±�ô °´»¿» ²±© ¹± ¬®¿·¹¸¬ ¬± »½¬·±² ìòçòÇ» Ò±

ìòé Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸»² §±« ¬¿®¬»¼ ø±® ©·´´ ¬¿®¬÷ ©±®µò



í Û³°´±§³»²¬ ¼»¬¿·´

Ø±«®´§

É»»µ´§

Ó±²¬¸´§

Ç»¿®´§

ì Û¿®²·²¹ ¿²¼ ¾»²»º·¬



ì

Ü»·¹² Ó¿²¿¹»®

íéòë

íðçð

îîçíì

ì

ì

ì

ìòè Ð´»¿» ¿§ ¸±© ³«½¸ §±« ¿®» ²±© »¿®²·²¹ ø±® ©·´´ »¿®²÷ò } ô òðð »¿½¸

ìòç Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¬± ¿§ ©¸¿¬ §±« ©¿²¬ ·º §±«® ½¿» · «½½»º«´æ

¿ Ì± ¹»¬ §±«® ±´¼ ¶±¾ ¾¿½µ ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»·²¬¿¬»³»²¬÷

¾ Ì± ¹»¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¿³» »³°´±§»® ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»ó»²¹¿¹»³»²¬÷

½ Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ±²´§

ëòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²» ±® ³±®» ±º ¬¸» ¾±¨» ¾»´±©ò ×² ¬¸» °¿½» °®±ª·¼»¼ô ¼»½®·¾» ¬¸» »ª»²¬ô

±® »®·» ±º »ª»²¬ô ¬¸¿¬ ¸¿ª» ½¿«»¼ §±« ¬± ³¿µ» ¬¸· ½´¿·³æ

¿ × ©¿ «²º¿·®´§ ¼·³·»¼ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´÷

¾ × ©¿ ¼·½®·³·²¿¬»¼ ¿¹¿·²¬ ±² ¬¸» ¹®±«²¼ ±º

½ × ¿³ ½´¿·³·²¹ ¿ ®»¼«²¼¿²½§ °¿§³»²¬

¼ × ¿³ ±©»¼

» Ñ¬¸»® ½±³°´¿·²¬

ëòî Ð´»¿» »¬ ±«¬ ¬¸» ¾¿½µ¹®±«²¼ ¿²¼ ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ·² ¬¸» °¿½» ¾»´±©ò

Ì¸» ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ¸±«´¼ ·²½´«¼» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ©¸»² ¬¸» »ª»²¬ø÷ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹

¿¾±«¬ ¸¿°°»²»¼å º±® »¨¿³°´»ô ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ ®»´¿¬» ¬± ¼·½®·³·²¿¬·±² ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¿´´

¬¸» ·²½·¼»²¬ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹ ¿¾±«¬ô ±® ¿¬ ´»¿¬ ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ´¿¬ ·²½·¼»²¬ò ×º §±«®

½±³°´¿·²¬ · ¿¾±«¬ °¿§³»²¬ §±« ¿®» ±©»¼ °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» °»®·±¼ ½±ª»®»¼ò

Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ë Ç±«® ½´¿·³

²±¬·½» °¿§

¸±´·¼¿§ °¿§

¿®®»¿® ±º °¿§

±¬¸»® °¿§³»²¬

Í»¨ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ »¯«¿´ °¿§÷

Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

Í»¨«¿´ ±®·»²¬¿¬·±²

Î¿½»

Î»´·¹·±² ±® ¾»´·»º

ß¹»


ð

ì

ì

ì

ì ì

ì

ì

ì

ì

ì

ï÷ × ©¿ ¾«´´·»¼ ¿²¼ ¸¿®¿»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ±º Û¨¬± ËÕ øÓ® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·÷î÷ Ú±®³¿´ ¼·½·°´·²¿®§ °®±½»¼«®» ©»®» ²±¬ º±´´±©»¼í÷ Ë²¿«¬¸±®·¦»¼ ¼»¼«½¬·±² ©»®» ³¿¼» º®±³ ³§ ¿´¿®§ì÷ Ú±®³¿´ ¹®·»ª¿²½» °®±½»¼«®» ©»®» ²±¬ º±´´±©»¼ë÷ Þ±¬¸ ³¿²¿¹»® × ¸¿¼ ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©·¬¸ ©»®» ´»º¬ ·² ½±²¬®±´ ±º ³§ ©»´º¿®»ê÷ Ì¸» ¬·³» ¬¿µ»² ¬± ®»±´ª» ³§ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©¿ «²®»¿±²¿¾´»é÷ Ó§ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ®»³¿·² «²®»±´ª»¼è÷ Ú±®»·¹² ´¿²¹«¿¹» ¿²¼ ¬¸» ³·«²¼»®¬¿²¼·²¹ ±º Û²¹´·¸ ¸¿ ¾»»² «»¼ ¿ ¿ ¼·½´¿·³»® ¾§ ³§ »³°´±§»®øÓ® Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±² ú Ó® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®»÷ç÷ Ó§ »³°´±§»® ¼·¼ ²±¬ ¿» ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±² ½±®®»½¬´§ ¬± ¿´´±© ³» ¿ °¸¿»¼ ®»¬«®² ¬± ©±®µô ©±®µ·²¹ °¿®¬ó¬·³»±® º´»¨·¾´» ¸±«®ïð÷ Ó§ ¸»¿´¬¸ ¸¿ ¾»»² »®·±«´§ ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸»» ¿½¬·±²ñ·²¿½¬·±²ïï÷ Ó§ ¬®«¬ ¿²¼ ½±²º·¼»²½» ·² ³§ »³°´±§»® ©¿ ¼»¬®±§»¼ ¿º¬»® ³¿²§ ¹±±¼ §»¿® »®ª·½»ïî÷ × ¸¿ª» ¾»»² «²º·¬ º±® ©±®µ ·²½»

ì

ëòí ×º §±«® ½´¿·³ ½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¿®» ³¿µ·²¹ ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®»

«²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê ø±¬¸»®©·» µ²±©² ¿ ¿ �©¸·¬´»¾´±©·²¹� ½´¿·³÷ô

°´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¾»´±© ·º §±« ©·¸ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸· º±®³ô ±® ·²º±®³¿¬·±² º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¾»

º±®©¿®¼»¼ ±² §±«® ¾»¸¿´º ¬± ¿ ®»´»ª¿²¬ ®»¹«´¿¬±® øµ²±©² ¿ ¿ �°®»½®·¾»¼ °»®±²� «²¼»® ¬¸»

®»´»ª¿²¬ ´»¹·´¿¬·±²÷ ¾§ ¬¸» Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½»ò

êòï Ý±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¬¸· »½¬·±² · ±°¬·±²¿´ô ¾«¬ ³¿§ ¸»´° ·º §±« ¬¿¬» ©¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±®

®»³»¼§ §±« ¿®» »»µ·²¹ º®±³ §±«® »³°´±§»® ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ ±º ¬¸· ½±³°´¿·²¬ò ×º §±« °»½·º§

¿² ¿³±«²¬ô °´»¿» »¨°´¿·² ¸±© §±« ¸¿ª» ½¿´½«´¿¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ º·¹«®»ò

éòï Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¿ ½±ª»®·²¹ ´»¬¬»® ©·¬¸ ¬¸· º±®³ò Ç±« ¸±«´¼ ¿¼¼ ¿²§ »¨¬®¿ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²

§±« ©¿²¬ « ¬± µ²±© ¸»®»ò Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ê É¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±® ®»³»¼§ ¿®» §±« »»µ·²¹á

é Ñ¬¸»® ·²º±®³¿¬·±²


Í¿¬ ì¬¸ Ü»½»³¾»® îðïð × ©¿ ¬®¿°°»¼ ·² Í°¿·² ¾§ ·²¼«¬®·¿´ ¿½¬·±² ¿²¼ ¾±±µ»¼ ¬¸» ²»¨¬ ¿ª¿·´¿¾´» ®»¬«®² º´·¹¸¬øè¬¸ Ü»½÷ ¿²¼ ®»°±®¬ ¬¸» ·²½·¼»²¬ ¬± ³§ «¾±®¼·²¿¬» ©¸± ®»´¿§»¼ ¬¸» ³»¿¹» ±²¬± ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ±º Û¨¬± «µ±² Ó±²¼¿§ ê¬¸ Ü»½»³¾»®

Ó±²ò ê¬¸ Ü»½ Ì¸» ³¿²¿¹»® øÓ® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·÷ ±º Û¨¬± «µ ¬¿®¬»¼ ¿² «²®»¿±²¿¾´» ·²ª»¬·¹¿¬·±² ·²¬± ³§¿¾»²½» ©·¬¸±«¬ ½±²¬¿½¬·²¹ ³»

Ì¸«® ç¬¸ Ü»½ × ®»¬«®² ¬± ©±®µ ¿¬ éæìë¿³× ¿³ ©¿®²»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» º·®¬ °»®±² × »» ¿¬ èæíð¿³ ·² ²± «²½»®¬¿·² ¬»®³ þ¬¸» ¾± · ²±¬ ¸¿°°§ ©·¬¸ §±«þ

Ô¿¬»® × ¿°°®±¿½¸ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ·² ¸· ±ºº·½» ¬± ¬®§ ¿²¼ «²¼»®¬¿²¼ ¬¸» ·¬«¿¬·±² ¿²¼ × ¿³ ¹®»»¬»¼ ·² ¿ «®´§º¿¸·±² þ±¸ ¸»®» ¸» ·á ©»ù´´ ¬¿´µ ´¿¬»®þ × ¿µ þ©¸§ ²±¬ ²±©áþ ¸» ®»°´·»¼ þ²± ´¿¬»®ô ¹»¬ ±² ©·¬¸ §±«® ©±®µþ

Ô¿¬»® ¬¸¿¬ ³±®²·²¹ ¿®±«²¼ ïð¿³ × ¿³ ½±®²»®»¼ ¿¬ ³§ ¼»µ ¾§ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ¿²¼ «¾¶»½¬»¼ ¬± ¿ ©»´´ °®»°¿®»¼«²¿²²±«²½»¼ ëóïð ³·²ò ¾«´´§·²¹ »·±² ¼«®·²¹ ©¸·½¸ × ¾®»¿µ ¼±©² ¿²¼ ®»°±®¬ ³§»´º «²©»´´ ¿²¼ ±² ¬¸»¿«¬¸±®·¬§ ±º ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ¹± ¸±³»òß¬ ïîæïë ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ½¿´´ ³» ±² ³§ °®·ª¿¬» ³±¾·´» °¸±²» ¿²¼ ±®¼»® ³» ¾¿½µ ¬± ©±®µ × ¿§ ©±®¼ ¬± ¬¸»»ºº»½¬ × ¿³ «²©»´´ °´»¿» ´»¿ª» ³» ¿´±²» × ¸¿²¹ «°ò Ø» ½¿´´ ³» ¿¹¿·² ¿²¼ ´»¿ª» ¿² ¿²©»® °¸±²» ³»¿¹»ò×º ±²´§ ¸» ¸¿¼ ½¿´´»¼ ³» º±«® ¼¿§ »¿®´·»® ¬¸·²¹ ©±«´¼ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ± ¼·ºº»®»²¬òß²±¬¸»® »³°´±§»» ¾«´´·»¼ ³» ¾§ °¸±²» ·²¬± ½±³°´»¬·²¹ ©±®µÚ®· ïð¬¸ Ü»½ Ü«» ¬± þ©±®µ ®»´¿¬»¼ ¬®»þ × ¹± ¬± ©±®µ ·² ¬¸» »¿®´§ ¸±«® ±º ¬¸» ³±®²·²¹ ¬± ½±³°´»¬» ¬¸» ©±®µ ×©¿ ·² ¬¸» °®±½» ±º ±² Ì¸«®¼¿§òÊ·¿ »ó³¿·× × ®»°±®¬ ¬¸¿¬ × ¿³ «ºº»®·²¹ º®±³ ¬®» ¿²¼ ¿´´»¹» ¾«´´§·²¹ò× ª··¬ ¿ Ü®ô ¬¸» Ü® ¿»» ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±² ¿ ¬®» ¿²¼ ¬¿¬» × ¿³ «²º·¬ ¬± ©±®µ «²¬·´ ¿º¬»® Ý¸®·¬³¿òß¬ ïîæïë°³ × ½¿´´ ³§ »³°´±§»® ¿²¼ ®»°±®¬ ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±² ¿¹¿·²ò

ì

ß ³§ »³°´±§»® Û¨¬± ¸¿ ¸¿¼ ¿ ³¿¶±® ®±´» ¬± °´¿§ ·² ³§ ½«®®»²¬ °±±® ¬¿¬» ±º ¸»¿´¬¸× ©±«´¼ ´·µ»Î»·²¬¿¬»³»²¬ ±º ¬¸» «²¿«¬¸±®·¦»¼ ¼»¼«½¬·±² º®±³ ³§ Ü»½»³¾»® îðïð ¿´¿®§×²½´«¼·²¹ í ¼¿§ °¿§ ¿²¼ ëòë ¸±«® ±º °¿§Î»·²¬¿¬»³»²¬ ±º º«´´ °¿§ º®±³ Ö¿²«¿®§ îðïï «²¬·´ îè¬¸ Ó¿§ îðïïîë ¼¿§ ¸±´·¼¿§ °¿§ îðïï »²¬·¬´»³»²¬é ¼¿§ ¸±´·¼¿§ °¿§ º±® ¬¸» Ý¸®·¬³¿ °»®·±¼ ©¸»² × ©¿ «²º·¬ º±® ©±®µÝ±³°»²¿¬·±² ïë §»¿® ¨ íêôððð ã }ëìðôððð

ß½¬ ·²ª±´ª»¼

ØÍÉ ïçéìô ÛÎß ïççêô ÉÌÎ ïççèô ÛÎ»´ß ïçççô Ûß îððîô Ûß îðïðò

Ð´»¿» º·´´ ·² ¬¸· »½¬·±² ±²´§ ·º §±« ¸¿ª» ¿°°±·²¬»¼ ¿ ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»ò ×º §±« ¼± º·´´ ·² ¬¸·

»½¬·±²ô ©» ©·´´ ·² º«¬«®» ±²´§ »²¼ ½±®®»°±²¼»²½» ¬± §±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª» ¿²¼ ²±¬ ¬± §±«ò

èòï Î»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»� ²¿³»æ

èòî Ò¿³» ±º ¬¸» ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»�

±®¹¿²·¿¬·±²æ

èòí ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

èòì Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ


èòê Ø±© ©±«´¼ ¬¸»§ °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ ¬¸»³áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ


è Ç±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»

à

ç Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

çòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ ·º §±« ½±²·¼»® §±« ¸¿ª» ¿ ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ Ç»Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¬¸· ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ · ¿²¼ ¬»´´ « ©¸¿¬ ¿·¬¿²½»ô ·º ¿²§ô §±« ©·´´ ²»»¼ ¿

§±«® ½´¿·³ °®±¹®»» ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» §¬»³ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ º±® ¿²§ ¸»¿®·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ ³¿§ ²»»¼

¬± ¾» ¸»´¼ ¿¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½» °®»³·»ò

ïð Ó«´¬·°´» ½¿»


ì

Ý«®®»²¬ ¼·¿¾·´·¬·»ô ´·¬·¹¿¬·±² ¬®»ô ©±®µ ®»´¿¬»¼ ¬®»ô ¼»°®»·±² ¿²¼ ¿²¨·»¬§ò ß Ø·¿¬« ¸»®²·¿ô Ð¿¬¼·¿¾·´·¬·»ô Ð±¬ ¬®¿«³¿¬·½ ¬®» ¼·±®¼»®ô ¿ ½±³°´»¨ °»®·ó¿²¿´ º·¬«´¿ ½±³³»²½»¼ ·² îððìóîððç ®»¯«·®·²¹¸±°·¬¿´·¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ë ±°»®¿¬·±²ò Ð»®·ó¿²¿´ ¿¾½» ¸±°·¬¿´·»¼ ¿²¼ ±°»®¿¬»¼ ±² ·² Ó¿§óîðïîò ß´´ ±º ©¸·½¸¸¿ª» ¸¿¼ ±® ©·´´ ¸¿ª» ¿ ·¹²·º·½¿²¬ ¿²¼ «¾¬¿²¬·¿´ »ºº»½¬ «°±² ³§ ¼¿§ ¬± ¼¿§ ¿½¬·ª·¬·»òÍ°»½·¿´ ²»»¼ô ¬± ½±³³«²·½¿¬»ô ±® ¾» °®»»²¬ ¿¬ ¸»¿®·²¹ ±²´§ ¾§ »ó³¿·´ ±® ¬»´»°¸±²»ò É·´´ ²±¬ ¾» ¿¾´» ¬±¿²©»® ¿²§ ±®¿´ ¯«»¬·±² ¾«¬ ©·´´ ¹·ª» ½±²·¼»®»¼ ¿²©»® ¾§ ·² ©®·¬·²¹ ¾§ »ó³¿·´ò

ì

ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ ×²º±®³¿¬·±² »½¬·±² ëòî

ïë¬¸ Ü»½ Ñ² ½¸»½µ·²¹ ³§ ¾¿²µ ¿½½±«²¬ × º·²¼ ¿ ¸±®¬ º¿´´ ¬± ³§ ¿´¿®§ô ±² ·²ª»¬·¹¿¬·±² × º·²¼ ¬¸»®» ¿®» «²¿«¬¸±®·¦»¼¼»¼«½¬·±² º®±³ ³§ °¿§ò

îï¬ Ü»½ Ó§ Ü® ®»¿»» ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±² ¿ ¬®» ¿²¼ ¬¿¬» × ¿³ «²º·¬ ¬± ©±®µ º±® ¿ º«®¬¸»® ³±²¬¸ ¾«¬ ³¿§ ¸¿ª» ¿°¸¿»¼ ®»¬«®² ¿²¼ ¿³»²¼»¼ ¼«¬·»ò

îí®¼ Ü»½ × ®»½»·ª» ¿² «²¼»·®»¼ »ó³¿·´ º®±³ Ó® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ©¸·½¸ ¾¿·½¿´´§ ¿§ ¼± ²±¬ ®»¬«®² ¬± ©±®µ «²¬·´ §±«¿®» º«´´§ ïððû º·¬ ¬± °»®º±®³ §±«® ¶±¾

ïð¬¸ Ö¿²«¿®§ îðïï × «¾³·¬ ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ´»¬¬»® ¬± ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® øÓ® Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±²÷ ±º ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ±º Û¨¬± ËÕ ò

ïî¬¸ Ö¿² × ®»½»·ª» ¿² «²¼»·®»¼ »ó³¿·´ º®±³ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® øÓ® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·÷ × ¸¿ª» ¿ ®»¹·¬»®»¼ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©·¬¸ò

ïí¬¸ Ö¿² ³¿·ª» ¿´¬»®¿¬·±² ¿®» ³¿¼» ¬± ³§ ¿´¿®§ ©·¬¸±«¬ ¿²§ ²±¬·º·½¿¬·±² ¼»°·¬» ¬¸» º¿½¬ × ¸¿ª» ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ·²°®±½» ¿²¼ × ¿³ «ºº»®·²¹ º®±³ ¬®»ò ß¬ ¬¸· °±·²¬ × ©¿ ®»²¼»®»¼ ¬±¬¿´´§ «²º·¬ ¬± ®»¬«®² ¬± ©±®µò

îð¬¸ Ö¿² × ¸¿ª» ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ¸»¿®·²¹ ©·¬¸±«¬ °®±°»® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·±² ³§ °±±® ¸»¿´¬¸ · ¿´± ¼±«¾¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® øÓ®Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±²÷ × ¸¿ª» ¬¸» ¸»¿®·²¹ ©·¬¸ò Ü«®·²¹ ¬¸· ¸»¿®·²¹ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® øÓ® Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±²÷ ¬¿¬» ¬¸»´¿²¹«¿¹» ¾¿®®·»® ¿ ¿ ¼·½´¿·³»® ¬¸»®»º±®» × ¿´± ¾»´·»ª» ±² ¬¸» ¹®±«²¼ ±º ²¿¬·±²¿´·¬§ × ¼·¼ ²±¬ ®»½»·ª» ¿ º¿·® ¸»¿®·²¹ò

îï¬ Ö¿² × «¾³·¬ ¿ î²¼ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ½±²½»®²·²¹ º·²¼·²¹ ¿²¼ ½±²¼«½¬ ¿®··²¹ ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸» ½±³°·´·²¹ ±º ³§ º·®¬ ¹®·»ª¿²½»Ü® ¿¼ª·» «²º·¬ º±® ©±®µ º±® ±²» ³±²¬¸ ¬®»ò

ç¬¸ Ú»¾ × ®»½»·ª» ½±²½´«·±² ´»¬¬»® ¬± ï¬ ú î²¼ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ·´´»¹¿´ ¿½¬·±² ¶«¬·º·»¼ò

ïï¬¸ Ú»¾ Ü® «²º·¬ º±® ©±®µ º±® ±²» ³±²¬¸ ¬®»ô ¼»°®»·±² ú ¿²¨·»¬§ò

ïî¬¸ Ú»¾ × Í«¾³·¬ ¿² ¿°°»¿´ ¬± ¬¸» ½±²½´«·±² ´»¬¬»® ¬± Ì¸» Û¨¬± ÝÛÑ øÓ® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®»÷ò

îë¬¸ Ú»¾ × ¿³ ±ºº»®»¼ ¿² ¿°°»¿´ ¸»¿®·²¹ ¼¿¬» ±º ç¬¸ Ó¿®½¸ »¨¿½¬´§ í ³±²¬¸ ¿º¬»® ¬¸» ¾«´´§·²¹ ·²½·¼»²¬òß¹¿·² ¬¸» ÝÛÑ øÓ® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®»÷ ¬¿¬» ¬¸» ´¿²¹«¿¹» ¾¿®®·»® ¿ ¿ ¼·½´¿·³»® ¬¸»®»º±®» × ¾»´·»ª» ±² ¬¸» ¹®±«²¼ ±º®¿½» × ©·´´ ²±¬ ®»½»·ª» ¿ º¿·® ¸»¿®·²¹ò

îè¬¸ Ú»¾ × ®»·¹²»¼ ¿ ¬®«¬ ¿²¼ ½±²º·¼»²½» ©·¬¸ ³§ »³°´±§»® · ¬±¬¿´´§ ¾®±µ»²ò

í®¼ Ó¿® × ®»½»·ª» ¿ ´»¬¬»® ½±³°±»¼ ±² ¾»¸¿´º ±º ¬¸» ÝÛÑ ±º Û¨¬± øÓ® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®»÷ ±ºº»®·²¹ ³±®» ¬·³» ¼»´¿§·²¹±°¬·±²ò

Þ¿½µ¹®±«²¼ ¬± ¾«´´§·²¹ ¿½¬·ª·¬·»

Ì¸· ©¿ ²»¿® ¬± ¬¸» º·²¿´ ¬®¿© ·² »®·» ±º ¾«´´§·²¹ ¿½¬·±² ¾§ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·Ì¸» ½±³°¿²§ º¿·´»¼ «²¼»® ¬¸» ØÍÛ ß½¬ ïçéì ¬± °®±ª·¼» ¿ ¿º» ©±®µ·²¹ »²ª·®±²³»²¬Ð®»ª·±« ·²½·¼»²¬ ±º ¾«´´§·²¹ ¾§ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ú Ó® Ì±®®»ï÷ Ð»®ª»®·±² ±º ¬¸» ½±«®» ±º ¶«¬·½» ·² îððé ¬¸» ½±³°¿²§ ½±ª»®»¼ «° ¿ °»»¼·²¹ ·²½·¼»²¬ ·²ª±´ª·²¹ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ó¬¸· ©±«´¼ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ÑÕ ·º ¸» ¸¿¼ ²±¬ ¾®¿¹¹»¼ ´±«¼´§ ¿²¼ ±°»²´§ ·² ¬¸» ±ºº·½» ¿¾±«¬ ¸· ¿½¬·±²òî÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ®»¹«´¿®´§ ·²¹´»¼ ±«¬ ·²¼·ª·¼«¿´ º±® »¨½»·ª» ¾´¿³» º±® ½±³°¿²§ º¿·´«®»í÷ Ñ² ±²» ±½½¿·±² ·² ¿ ³»»¬·²¹ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ±°»²´§ ¸«³·´·¿¬»¼ Ó® Ô»©· ±®¼»®·²¹ ¸·³ ¬± °»®º±®³ ¿² ·´´»¹¿´ ¿½¬ ¬±©¸·½¸ Ó® Ô»©· ®»°´·»¼ ¿´³±¬ ·² ¬»¿® þ× ½¿²²±¬ ¼± ¬¸¿¬ Ö±¸² × ©±«´¼ ´±±» ³§ ¬¿¬« ¿ ¿ ½¸¿®¬»®»¼ ¿½½±«²¬¿²¬þ Ó®Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ®»°´·»¼ ½±´¼´§ þÖ±¸²ô §±« ¼± ¿ × ¿§ô × ¿³ ¬¸» ¾±þ Ó® Ô»©· ´»º¬ ¬¸» ³»»¬·²¹ ·² ¹®»¿¬ ¼·¬®»ò Ó® Ô»©·©¿ º®»¯«»²¬´§ ¿®¹«·²¹ ©·¬¸ Ó® Þ ·² ¬¸» ³¿²²»®òì÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ½±²¬¿²¬´§ «»¼ ¬¸» ©±®¼ ¿½µ ±® ¿½µ»¼ ·²¹´·²¹ ±«¬ Í¬»°¸¿²» Ð»®½¸» ±º Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½» ·² ¸·¿¾»²½» º±® ³«½¸ ±º ¸· ª»²±³ë÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ³¿§ ¸¿ª» ¼»º®¿«¼»¼ ¬¸» ·²´¿²¼ ®»ª»²«» ±º ¬¿¨»ê÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· °»²¬ ³±¬ ±º ¸· ¬·³» ½´±»¼ ·² ¸· ±ºº·½» ©¸»®» ¸» µ»°¬ ¿ ´¿®¹» ¼±¹ ©¸·½¸ ¾¿®µ»¼ ¿¬ ¿²§¾±¼§ ©¸±©»²¬ ·² ¬¸»®»é÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ½±²¬¿²¬´§ ½®·¬·½·»¼ ¬¸» Ë²·¬»¼ µ·²¹¼±³ ¿²¼ ·¬ °»±°´»è÷ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ¬¿¬»¼ þ× ½¿² ¿½µ §±« ¿´´ ©¸»²»ª»® × ´·µ»ô ©·¬¸±«¬ ½¿´´·²¹ ¿²§¾±¼§ ·²þ

Ì¸» ½´¿·³¿²¬ ³¿²¿¹» ¬± ¼»¿´ ©·¬¸ ¬¸· ±«¬®¿¹»±« ¾»¸¿ª·±® ¾«¬ ·² ¬¸» »²¼ «½½«³¾»¼ ¬± ¬¸» º«´´ ©®¿¬¸ ±º Ó®Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·· ·³°®±°»® ¿¬¬»²¬·±²ò

D D M M Y Y Y Y- -

D D M M Y Y Y Y- -

Ó® Ü±«¹´¿ Ù¿®¼·²»®

Û¨¬± ËÕ Ô¬¼

êé Î±«²¼°±²¼

Ó»´µ¸¿³

ÍÒïî èÛÞ

ì

´»¹¿´»®ª·½»à°»²·²«´¿ó«µò½±³

Í¿´» ¿²¼ Ð®±¶»½¬ Ó¿²¿¹»³»²¬ ±º °»½·¿´·¬ »´¿¬±³»® °®±¼«½¬ ¬± ±ºº¸±®» ·²¼«¬®·»ò

í

ì

ì

ìïðçíïîñîðïî

ïèóðèóîððí

îèóðëóîðïï

ì

ì

Ü»·¹² Ó¿²¿¹»®

ì

ì

ì

ì

ì

Ð´»¿» »» ¬¸» °¿°»® ¿°¿®¬ò

Ì¸· ½´¿·³ · ¿ ¼«°´·½¿¬» ±º ½´¿·³ ïìððëððñîðïï ¬¸¿¬ ¸¿ ¿´®»¿¼§ ¾»»² ¸»¿®¼ ·² Þ®·¬±´ Û³°´±§³»²¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´ò

Ì¸» ½´¿·³¿²¬ ¸¿ ®»·«»¼ ïìððëððñîðïï ·² ¬¸» º±®³ ±º ì ¼«°´·½¿¬» ÛÌï ·² Þ®·¬±´ ¿²¼ ¿ ë¬¸ ÛÌï ·² ß¾»®¼»»²¾§ ½¸¿²¹·²¹ ¬¸» ½±³°¿²§ ¿¼¼®» ¬± ·¬ ®»¹·¬»®»¼ ±ºº·½» ·² ß¾»®¼»»²ò

Ì¸» ®»°±²¼»²¬ ¿°°´·» º±® ¬¸» ½´¿·³ ¬± ¾» ¬®«½µ ±«¬ ¿ ¬¸» »®ª·½» ±º ¬¸· ½´¿·³ ¿°°»¿® ¬± ¾» ¿² ¿¾«» ±º°®±½»ò Ì¸» °®±½»»¼·²¹ ¸¿ª» ¾»»² ¾®±«¹¸¬ ª»¨¿¬·±«´§ò

Ì¸» ®» ¶«¼·½¿¬¿ ¼±½¬®·²» ¿°°´·» ¬± ¬¸» ¾®·²¹·²¹ ±º ¬¸»» °®±½»»¼·²¹ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» ½´¿·³¿²¬ ¸±«´¼ ¾» ¼»¾¿®®»¼º®±³ °®±½»»¼·²¹ ©·¬¸ ¬¸· ½´¿·³ò

Ò»·´ Ý´±©®»§

Ð»²·²«´¿ Þ«·²» Í»®ª·½» Ô¬¼

î

Ý¸»»¬¸¿³ Ø·´´ Î±¿¼

Ó¿²½¸»¬»®

Ù®»¿¬»® Ó¿²½¸»¬»®

Óì ìÚÞ

ðèìì èçî îééç

ìíèîí

ì

²»·´ò½´±©®»§à°»²·²«´¿ó«µò½±³

ì

In the Aberdeen Employment Tribunal Case Number: 4109312/2012 BETWEEN :

MR DOUGLAS GARDINER (Claimant)

vs.

EXSTO UK LTD (Respondent)

RESPONSE – SECTION 5

This response sets out the events leading to the issuing of this duplicate claim. It also points out that the claims made in this ET1 have already been heard and judgment issued by another tribunal, with numerous review applications made together with an appeal and subsequent challenges to the appeal decision. The respondent applies for the claim to be struck out as an abuse of process. Duplicate claim The contents of this claim have already been heard and judgment issued at the Bristol Employment Tribunal in September 2011. This is the 2nd of 5 duplicate ET1s issued by the same claimant on the same facts, the remaining four duplicate ET1s have been served on the respondent by Bristol tribunal.

1. Mr Gardiner’s first claim is case number 1400500/2011. There was a telephone CMD on 20th April 2011 and a Hearing on 7 th September 2011. The unanimous judgment of that tribunal was to dismiss all claims against all three respondents in that case. Written reasons were issued on 14th October 2011.

2. The claimant appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal on 15 th

November 2011.

3. The appeal was rejected in the sift on 7 th February 2012, on the basis the appeal “looked at as a whole, seeks to have the facts retried; that is not the purpose of appeals to the Employment Appeal Tribunal”.

4. The claimant applied to Bristol tribunal for a review on 12 th April 2012, which was rejected on 30th April 2012.

5. The claimant wrote a “letter of appeal” to Bristol on 2nd May 2012 which was treated as another review and rejected.

6. The claimant wrote to the Bristol tribunal on 10 th May 2012 which requested the case be reheard. The Judge declined to deal with the matter in this fashion.

7. The claimant applied to the EAT for a Rule 3(10) Hearing which took place on 16th May 2012 with the claimant appearing by telephone and the respondent’s representative in person, at which the claimant (having had advice from an ELAAS representative) appeared to accept there was no right of appeal on the facts, only on the law, and appeared willing to withdraw the appeal although left it to the Judge to formally determine the outcome. The Judge dismissed the appeal.

8. The claimant wrote again to the Bristol tribunal on 24 th May 2012 requesting a Full Hearing of his case in the EAT.

9. The claimant wrote again on 4 th July to Bristol tribunal. Judge Owen responded on 12th July stating “it appears that Mr Gardiner believes that, as a claimant who has lost his case, he is entitled to request information of a Judge and to challenge his decision in correspondence ad nauseam. That is empathetically not the case.”

10. Notwithstanding that hint, the claimant wrote again to Bristol on 20 th July. The Regional Employment Judge Parkin responded stating no useful purpose is served by further correspondence.

11. The claimant had also written to the EAT; his letters of 24 th May and 21st June asking for a review were refused in a Judgment of 3 rd August 2012 on the grounds of having no reasonable prospect of success.

12. The claimant wrote again to the EAT on 23 rd August and 5th September asking for a review but this was considered out of time by the EAT and they said no further action will be taken.

13. That appeared to be the end of the matter, until the claimant submitted four duplicate ET1s to Bristol which were received by them on 10 th September, 14th September, 19th September and 20th September. A further ET1 was sent to Aberdeen tribunal and was received there on 12th September.

Potentially vexatious behaviour and abuse of process The claim served by the Aberdeen tribunal only appears to have made its way to Aberdeen due to the claimant using the respondent’s registered office address. This appears to be an attempt to cause a much disruption to the respondent as possible, by causing claims to be served in Aberdeen, on top of the four claims served to their address in Melksham in Wiltshire as well as on additional respondents at addresses in France. The claimant has stated to the Aberdeen tribunal that his employer is Mr C Torres at 21 Carden Place, Aberdeen, however in his claim forms to Bristol, the claimant gives an address in France for Mr Torres.

The claimant has also removed the end date of employment from these duplicate ET1s, which appears to be an attempt to avoid any initial action being taken by both the Aberdeen and Bristol tribunals in relation to the claims appearing to be out of time. In his four ET1s to Bristol tribunal, he has stated “…the claimant has started the submission of ET1’s in bite sized pieces so he can express himself as he wishes. These are not the actions of a vexatious litigant abusing the system a failing system has abused the claimant”; such a comment indicating the claimant is at least aware that his behaviour is sailing close to the wind of being vexatious and/or an abuse of process. Accordingly the respondent applies to the tribunal for this claim to be struck out. Out of time All five new claims are significantly out of time. The Bristol tribunal has not required a response from the respondent at this stage, instead serving an Order for Additional Information on the claimant which, to date, we are awaiting the Judge’s determination on any information the claimant might have supplied. We understand he has filled in the CMD agenda issued by the Aberdeen tribunal and sent that to Bristol. The claimant’s original ET1 stated his employment terminated on 28 th May 2011. The respondent agreed this to be the effective date of termination in its original ET3. This new claim form is therefore significantly out of time and should be struck out. Res judicata The claimant should be debarred from bringing a further claim on the same facts by the doctrine of res judicata. There has to be finality of litigation and the same facts cannot be repeatedly regurgitated in the form of appeals, reviews and new ET1s. The findings of fact made by the Bristol Tribunal in September 2011 are incontrovertible and the Employment Appeal Tribunal has refused to disturb the findings on appeal. The claimant should be debarred from having the same facts retried and from submitting his claim again to another Employment Tribunal in the hope that a new tribunal will give him the outcome he wants. Substantive response to claims

1. The Claimant was an employee of Exsto UK Ltd from 18 th August 2003 until he resigned on 28th February 2011. The effective date of termination of 28th May 2011, once his three month notice period ended. This duplicate claim is, accordingly, out of time.

2. Exsto (UK) Ltd specialises in the development and bespoke design of

polymer solutions for a wide range of industries.

3. The Claimant worked as a Designer of parts and concepts for the petrol and gas sector.

Unfair constructive dismissal

4. The Respondent again denies the unfair constructive dismissal claim and resists the claimant’s allegations in their entirety.

5. The Claimant was expected to return to work on Monday 6 th December

2010 after spending some time in Spain as part of his annual leave. The Claimant contacted one of his colleagues on Saturday 4 th December 2010 to state that due to airline strikes, he would not be able to get a return flight to the UK until Wednesday 8 th December 2010 and thus would not return to work until the following Thursday.

6. Upon receiving this information on Monday 6 th December, John

Baxevanidis, Exsto’s General Manager, checked the progress of the Spanish airline strikes and discovered that flights from Spain to the UK had at that time become available.

7. The claimant did not return to work until Thursday 9 th December. Mr

Baxevanidis had a conversation with him to discuss why he had not called the office to inform Mr Baxevanidis of his delayed return to work in line with the absence reporting procedure. Additionally, the Claimant was asked why he did not seek out an earlier flight back to the UK. The Claimant could not provide a satisfactory explanation for his lack of communication and his failure to seek an earlier flight to the UK.

8. Consequently, it was communicated to him that the 3 days for which he was absent would be considered unauthorised absences and so was not entitled to be paid wages for the 6 th, 7th and 8th December 2010.

9. Upon being told that he would not be paid for his unauthorised

absences, the Claimant said “Well if that’s the case I’m ill, I’m going home ok?” and he picked up his coat and left the office immediately.

10. The Bristol Tribunal made a finding of fact at the Hearing on 7 th and 8th

September 2011 that the discussions which took place on Thursday 9 th December 2010 between the claimant and Mr Baxevanidis was one that a “manager was entitled to have”. The Bristol tribunal found that “Mr Baxevanidis [never] went beyond what was permissible in being direct and critical of an employee”. The Judgment goes on to say “our conclusion, therefore, is that the manager was guilty of neither bullying nor harassment nor anything else that amounted to a breach of contract. It is also clear that Mr Gardiner only said he was ill at the end of the discussion and did not say what was wrong or stay to explain.”

11. The claimant raised grievances on 10 th January 2011 which was heard on 20th January 2011. A further grievance was issued and heard on paper and the decision for both grievances was issued on 9 th February

2011. The Bristol tribunal found there was no fundamental breach of contract by the respondent which would have entitled the claimant to resign and claim constructive dismissal. The claimant acted too hastily in resigning whilst the appeal process was ongoing.

12. No finding of unfair dismissal was made out on the facts and this duplicate claim should also fail for the same reasons as the first, necessitating the claim to be struck out.

Disability discrimination

13. The Bristol tribunal made a finding at paragraph 27 of their written reasons that the claimant had not shown he was disabled so cannot succeed with a claim for disability discrimination. The claimant has regurgitated the same claim nearly a year later, an argument which has no reasonable prospect in light of the fact the argument is out of time and the circumstances are not sufficient to amount to a disability.

14. The Bristol tribunal went on to state at paragraph 28 there was another

reason why the disability discrimination claim must fail, in that a huge amount of information was supplied in respect of every aspect of his case except in respect of discrimination.

15. The issues raised in this ET1 are the same as the first ET1 therefore the duplicate claim should be struck out.

Race discrimination

16. The Bristol tribunal stated at paragraph 29 of their written reasons that the claimant was unable to show less favourable treatment as compared to a French speaker. Their conclusion was that “the respondent did not treat the claimant less favourably than they would have treated a French person nor did they apply a provision which had a disparate effect on the claimant as an English speaker”. The claim in this ET1 remains unchanged in its substance to that in the first ET1.

17. Again, the issues raised in this ET1 are the same as the first ET1 and

therefore this duplicate claim should be struck out.

Monetary claims

18. The claimant has repeated the same monetary claims as in the first ET1, despite the Bristol tribunal finding that the claimant was not entitled to be paid for the three days absence in December 2010. The remaining monetary claims failed due to lack of evidence. The respondent denies that any money is due.

In conclusion The claim is a duplicate of a claim already heard in the Bristol tribunal. The bringing of the claim in Aberdeen by using the company’s registered office address rather than the trading address used in the other 4 ET1s and the original ET1 is unreasonable conduct on the part of the claimant and tantamount to vexatious behaviour. This claim is no different from the original ET1 and as findings of fact have been made at the Bristol tribunal already on the same claim, those findings should not be disturbed by another tribunal especially when the Employment Appeal Tribunal have refrained from doing so. The respondent calls for the duplicate ET1 to be struck out.





4) The parties to the proceedings before the employment tribunal, other than the appellant, were 1st Respondent EXSTO UK LTD 67 Roundponds, Melksham, Wiltshire 2nd Respondent Mr. J BAXEVANIDIS 3rd Respondent Mr J M PENELON 4th Respondent Mr C TORRES 5) Copies of— (a) The written record of the employment tribunal’s judgment, and the written reasons of the employment tribunal; (b) The claim (ET1); (c) - are attached to this notice.



ï Ç±«® ¼»¬¿·´

ïòï Ì·¬´»æ Ó® Ó® Ó· Ó Ñ¬¸»®

ïòî Ú·®¬ ²¿³» ø±® ²¿³»÷æ

ïòí Í«®²¿³» ±® º¿³·´§ ²¿³»æ

ïòì Ü¿¬» ±º ¾·®¬¸ ø¼¿¬»ñ³±²¬¸ñ§»¿®÷æ ß®» §±«æ ³¿´»á º»³¿´»á

ïòë ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

ïòê Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»

ø©¸»®» ©» ½¿² ½±²¬¿½¬ §±« ·² ¬¸» ¼¿§ ¬·³»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ

ïòé Ø±© ©±«´¼ §±« °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ §±«áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ

îòï Ù·ª» ¬¸» ²¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®» ½´¿·³·²¹¿¹¿·²¬ò

îòî ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ


Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

×º ¬¸»®» ¿®» ±¬¸»® ®»°±²¼»²¬ °´»¿» ½±³°´»¬» Í»½¬·±² ïïò


î Î»°±²¼»²¬� ¼»¬¿·´

à


ì

Ü±«¹´¿ ×¿·²

Ù¿®¼·²»®


ë

É»¿ª»®² Ý±«®¬

Ý¸·°°»²¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïì ðÔË



ì

¼±«¹ò¹¿®¼·²»®à¬·½¿´·ò½±ò«µ

Ó® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· øÓ¿²¿¹»® Û¨¬± ËÕ÷

Û¨¬± ËÕ Ô¬¼

êé

Î±«²¼°±²¼

Ó»´µ¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïî èÛÞ


íòï Ð´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ·º °±·¾´»ò

É¸»² ¼·¼ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬¿®¬á

× §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ½±²¬·²«·²¹á Ç» Ò±

×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ ½»¿»¼ô ±® §±« ¿®» ·²

¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»ô ©¸»² ¼·¼ ·¬ô ±® ©·´´ ·¬ô »²¼á

íòî Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¶±¾ §±« ¼± ±® ¼·¼ò

ìòï Ø±© ³¿²§ ¸±«® ±² ¿ª»®¿¹» ¼±ô ±® ¼·¼ô §±« ©±®µ »¿½¸ ©»»µá ¸±«® »¿½¸ ©»»µ

ìòî Ø±© ³«½¸ ¿®»ô ±® ©»®»ô §±« °¿·¼á

Ð¿§ ¾»º±®» ¬¿¨ } ô òðð

Ò±®³¿´ ¬¿µ»ó¸±³» °¿§ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ } ô òðð

±ª»®¬·³»ô ½±³³··±²ô ¾±²«» ¿²¼ ± ±²÷

ìòí ×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ »²¼»¼ô ¼·¼ §±« ©±®µ

ø±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®÷ ¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»áÇ» Ò±

×º �Ç»�ô ¸±© ³¿²§ ©»»µ� ±® ³±²¬¸� ²±¬·½»

¼·¼ §±« ©±®µô ±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®á ©»»µ ³±²¬¸

ìòì É»®» §±« ·² §±«® »³°´±§»®� °»²·±² ½¸»³»á Ç» Ò±

Ð´»¿» ¿²©»® ìòë ¬± ìòç ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ô ±® °¿®¬ ±º ·¬ô · ¿¾±«¬ «²º¿·® ±® ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´ò

ìòë ×º §±« ®»½»·ª»¼ ¿²§ ±¬¸»® ¾»²»º·¬ô »ò¹ò ½±³°¿²§ ½¿®ô ³»¼·½¿´ ·²«®¿²½»ô »¬½ô º®±³ §±«®

»³°´±§»®ô °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¼»¬¿·´ò

ìòê Í·²½» ´»¿ª·²¹ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ª» §±« ¹±¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾á

×º �Ò±�ô °´»¿» ²±© ¹± ¬®¿·¹¸¬ ¬± »½¬·±² ìòçòÇ» Ò±

ìòé Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸»² §±« ¬¿®¬»¼ ø±® ©·´´ ¬¿®¬÷ ©±®µò



í Û³°´±§³»²¬ ¼»¬¿·´

Ø±«®´§

É»»µ´§

Ó±²¬¸´§

Ç»¿®´§

ì Û¿®²·²¹ ¿²¼ ¾»²»º·¬



ì

Ü»·¹² Ó¿²¿¹»®

íéòë

íðçð

îîçíì

ì

ì

Ë²½´»¿®

ì

ìòè Ð´»¿» ¿§ ¸±© ³«½¸ §±« ¿®» ²±© »¿®²·²¹ ø±® ©·´´ »¿®²÷ò } ô òðð »¿½¸

ìòç Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¬± ¿§ ©¸¿¬ §±« ©¿²¬ ·º §±«® ½¿» · «½½»º«´æ

¿ Ì± ¹»¬ §±«® ±´¼ ¶±¾ ¾¿½µ ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»·²¬¿¬»³»²¬÷

¾ Ì± ¹»¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¿³» »³°´±§»® ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»ó»²¹¿¹»³»²¬÷

½ Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ±²´§

ëòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²» ±® ³±®» ±º ¬¸» ¾±¨» ¾»´±©ò ×² ¬¸» °¿½» °®±ª·¼»¼ô ¼»½®·¾» ¬¸» »ª»²¬ô

±® »®·» ±º »ª»²¬ô ¬¸¿¬ ¸¿ª» ½¿«»¼ §±« ¬± ³¿µ» ¬¸· ½´¿·³æ

¿ × ©¿ «²º¿·®´§ ¼·³·»¼ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´÷

¾ × ©¿ ¼·½®·³·²¿¬»¼ ¿¹¿·²¬ ±² ¬¸» ¹®±«²¼ ±º

½ × ¿³ ½´¿·³·²¹ ¿ ®»¼«²¼¿²½§ °¿§³»²¬

¼ × ¿³ ±©»¼

» Ñ¬¸»® ½±³°´¿·²¬

ëòî Ð´»¿» »¬ ±«¬ ¬¸» ¾¿½µ¹®±«²¼ ¿²¼ ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ·² ¬¸» °¿½» ¾»´±©ò

Ì¸» ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ¸±«´¼ ·²½´«¼» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ©¸»² ¬¸» »ª»²¬ø÷ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹

¿¾±«¬ ¸¿°°»²»¼å º±® »¨¿³°´»ô ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ ®»´¿¬» ¬± ¼·½®·³·²¿¬·±² ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¿´´

¬¸» ·²½·¼»²¬ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹ ¿¾±«¬ô ±® ¿¬ ´»¿¬ ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ´¿¬ ·²½·¼»²¬ò ×º §±«®

½±³°´¿·²¬ · ¿¾±«¬ °¿§³»²¬ §±« ¿®» ±©»¼ °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» °»®·±¼ ½±ª»®»¼ò

Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ë Ç±«® ½´¿·³

²±¬·½» °¿§

¸±´·¼¿§ °¿§

¿®®»¿® ±º °¿§

±¬¸»® °¿§³»²¬

Í»¨ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ »¯«¿´ °¿§÷

Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

Í»¨«¿´ ±®·»²¬¿¬·±²

Î¿½»

Î»´·¹·±² ±® ¾»´·»º

ß¹»


ð

ì

ì

ì ì

ì

ì

Û¨¬± ¿½¬·±² çóïð¬¸ Ü»½»³¾»® îðïðï÷ × ©¿ ¾«´´·»¼ ¿²¼ ¸¿®¿»¼ ¾§ Û¨¬± ËÕ ó ¬±´¼ × ©¿ ´§·²¹î÷ Ú±®³¿´ ¼·½·°´·²¿®§ °®±½»¼«®» ©»®» ²±¬ º±´´±©»¼ × ©¿ ¼»²·»¼ ¿ º¿·® ¬®·¿´í÷ Ì¸» ³¿²¿¹»® × ¸¿¼ ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©·¬¸ ©¿ ´»º¬ ·² ½±²¬®±´ ±º ³§ ©»´º¿®» Ó® Ð»²»´±² ¼·¼ ²±¬ ·³°´»³»²¬½±³°¿²§ °®±½»¼«®»ì÷ Ú±®»·¹² ´¿²¹«¿¹» ¿²¼ ¬¸» ³·«²¼»®¬¿²¼·²¹ ±º Û²¹´·¸ ¸¿ ¾»»² «»¼ ¿ ¿ ¼·½´¿·³»® ¾§ ³§ »³°´±§»®Ó® Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±²ë÷ Ó§ »³°´±§»® ¼·¼ ²±¬ ¿» ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±² ½±®®»½¬´§ ¬± ¿´´±© ³» ¿ °¸¿»¼ ®»¬«®² ¬± ©±®µô ©±®µ·²¹ °¿®¬ó¬·³»±® º´»¨·¾´» ¸±«® ó × ©¿ ±®¼»®»¼ ¾¿½µ ¬± ©±®µê÷ Ó§ ¸»¿´¬¸ ¸¿ ¾»»² »®·±«´§ ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸»» ¿½¬·±²ñ·²¿½¬·±²é÷ Ó§ ¬®«¬ ¿²¼ ½±²º·¼»²½» ·² ³§ »³°´±§»® ¸¿ ¾»»² ¼»¬®±§»¼ ¿º¬»® ³¿²§ ¹±±¼ §»¿® »®ª·½»

ì

ëòí ×º §±«® ½´¿·³ ½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¿®» ³¿µ·²¹ ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®»

«²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê ø±¬¸»®©·» µ²±©² ¿ ¿ �©¸·¬´»¾´±©·²¹� ½´¿·³÷ô

°´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¾»´±© ·º §±« ©·¸ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸· º±®³ô ±® ·²º±®³¿¬·±² º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¾»

º±®©¿®¼»¼ ±² §±«® ¾»¸¿´º ¬± ¿ ®»´»ª¿²¬ ®»¹«´¿¬±® øµ²±©² ¿ ¿ �°®»½®·¾»¼ °»®±²� «²¼»® ¬¸»

®»´»ª¿²¬ ´»¹·´¿¬·±²÷ ¾§ ¬¸» Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½»ò

êòï Ý±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¬¸· »½¬·±² · ±°¬·±²¿´ô ¾«¬ ³¿§ ¸»´° ·º §±« ¬¿¬» ©¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±®

®»³»¼§ §±« ¿®» »»µ·²¹ º®±³ §±«® »³°´±§»® ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ ±º ¬¸· ½±³°´¿·²¬ò ×º §±« °»½·º§

¿² ¿³±«²¬ô °´»¿» »¨°´¿·² ¸±© §±« ¸¿ª» ½¿´½«´¿¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ º·¹«®»ò

éòï Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¿ ½±ª»®·²¹ ´»¬¬»® ©·¬¸ ¬¸· º±®³ò Ç±« ¸±«´¼ ¿¼¼ ¿²§ »¨¬®¿ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²

§±« ©¿²¬ « ¬± µ²±© ¸»®»ò Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ê É¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±® ®»³»¼§ ¿®» §±« »»µ·²¹á

é Ñ¬¸»® ·²º±®³¿¬·±²


Í¿¬ ì¬¸ Ü»½»³¾»® îðïð × ©¿ ¬®¿°°»¼ ·² Í°¿·² ¾§ ·²¼«¬®·¿´ ¿½¬·±² ¿²¼ ¾±±µ»¼ ¬¸» ²»¨¬ ¿ª¿·´¿¾´» ®»¬«®² º´·¹¸¬øè¬¸ Ü»½÷ ¿²¼ ®»°±®¬ ¬¸» ·²½·¼»²¬ ¬± Ê·²½»²¬ Þ»¦¿®¼ ©¸± ®»´¿§»¼ ¬¸» ³»¿¹» ±²¬± ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ±º Û¨¬± «µ±² Ó±²¼¿§ ê¬¸ Ü»½»³¾»®

Ì¸«® ç¬¸ Ü»½ × ®»¬«®² ¬± ©±®µ ¿¬ éæìë¿³× ¿³ ©¿®²»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» º·®¬ °»®±² × »» ¿¬ èæíð¿³ ·² ²± «²½»®¬¿·² ¬»®³ þ¬¸» ¾± · ²±¬ ¸¿°°§ ©·¬¸ §±«þÔ¿¬»® × ¿°°®±¿½¸ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ·² ¸· ±ºº·½» ¬± ¬®§ ¿²¼ «²¼»®¬¿²¼ ¬¸» ·¬«¿¬·±² ¿²¼ × ¿³ ¹®»»¬»¼ ·² ¿ «®´§º¿¸·±² þ±¸ ¸»®» ¸» ·á ©»ù´´ ¬¿´µ ´¿¬»®þ × ¿µ»¼ °±´·¬»´§ þ©¸§ ²±¬ ²±©áþ ¸» ®»°´·»¼ þ²± ´¿¬»®ô ¹»¬ ±² ©·¬¸ §±«®©±®µþÔ¿¬»® ¬¸¿¬ ³±®²·²¹ ¿®±«²¼ ïð¿³ × ¿³ ½±®²»®»¼ ¿¬ ³§ ¼»µ ¾§ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ¿²¼ «¾¶»½¬»¼ ¬± ¿ ©»´´ °®»°¿®»¼«²¿²²±«²½»¼ ëóïð ³·²ò ¾«´´§·²¹ »·±² ¼«®·²¹ ©¸·½¸ × ¾®»¿µ ¼±©² ¿²¼ ®»°±®¬ ³§»´º «²©»´´ ¿²¼ ±² ¬¸»¿«¬¸±®·¬§ ±º ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ¹± ¸±³»ò øÌ¸· ³»»¬·²¹ ¿²¼ ½±²»¯«»²¬ ¿½¬·±² ©»®» ¿² ·²º®·²¹»³»²¬ ±º ¾¿·½¸«³¿² ®·¹¸¬÷ß¬ ïîæïë Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ½¿´´ ³» ±² ³§ °®·ª¿¬» ³±¾·´» °¸±²» ©¸·´¬ × ¿³ ·½µ ·² ¾»¼ ¿²¼ ±®¼»® ³» ¾¿½µ ¬±©±®µ × ¿§ ©±®¼ ¬± ¬¸» »ºº»½¬ × ¿³ «²©»´´ °´»¿» ´»¿ª» ³» ¿´±²» ¬¸· · ¸¿®¿³»²¬ × ¸¿²¹ «°ò Ø» ½¿´´ ³»¿¹¿·² ¿²¼ ´»¿ª» ¿² ¿²©»® °¸±²» ³»¿¹» ¬¿¬·²¹ ØÎ ´¿©òß¬ ïîæíð × ½¿´´ ³§ ³¿²¹»® ³¿²¿¹»® Ó® Ð»²»´±² ¿²¼ ®»°±®¬ ¬¸» ¾«´´§·²¹ ¬± ¸·³Ó® Þ»¦¿®¼ ½¿´´ ³» ·² ¬¸» ¿º¬»®²±±² ¿² ¿µ ³» ±² ¾»¸¿´º ±º ¬¸» ½±³°¿²§ ¬± ©±®µ º®±³ ¸±³»Ú®· ïð¬¸ Ü»½ Ü«» ¬± þ©±®µ ®»´¿¬»¼ ¬®»þ × ¹± ¬± ©±®µ ·² ¬¸» »¿®´§ ¸±«® ±º ¬¸» ³±®²·²¹ ¬± ½±³°´»¬» ¬¸» ©±®µ ×©¿ ·² ¬¸» °®±½» ±º ±² Ì¸«®¼¿§òÊ·¿ »ó³¿·× × ®»°±®¬ ·² ©®·¬·²¹ ³§ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ¬¸¿¬ × ¿³ «ºº»®·²¹ º®±³ ¬®» ¿²¼ ¸¿¼ ¾»»² ¾«´´·»¼ò× ª··¬ ¿ Ü®ô ¬¸» Ü® ¿»» ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±² ¿ ¬®» ¿²¼ ¬¿¬» × ¿³ «²º·¬ ¬± ©±®µ «²¬·´ ¿º¬»® Ý¸®·¬³¿òß¬ ïîæïë°³ × ½¿´´ ³§ »³°´±§»® ¿²¼ ®»°±®¬ ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±² ¿¹¿·²ò

Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ïë §»¿® ±º ´± ±º ¿´¿®§ ïë ¨ }íêôððð ã }ëìðôððð


Ð´»¿» º·´´ ·² ¬¸· »½¬·±² ±²´§ ·º §±« ¸¿ª» ¿°°±·²¬»¼ ¿ ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»ò ×º §±« ¼± º·´´ ·² ¬¸·

»½¬·±²ô ©» ©·´´ ·² º«¬«®» ±²´§ »²¼ ½±®®»°±²¼»²½» ¬± §±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª» ¿²¼ ²±¬ ¬± §±«ò

èòï Î»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»� ²¿³»æ

èòî Ò¿³» ±º ¬¸» ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»�

±®¹¿²·¿¬·±²æ

èòí ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

èòì Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ


èòê Ø±© ©±«´¼ ¬¸»§ °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ ¬¸»³áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ


è Ç±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»

à

ç Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

çòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ ·º §±« ½±²·¼»® §±« ¸¿ª» ¿ ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ Ç»Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¬¸· ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ · ¿²¼ ¬»´´ « ©¸¿¬ ¿·¬¿²½»ô ·º ¿²§ô §±« ©·´´ ²»»¼ ¿

§±«® ½´¿·³ °®±¹®»» ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» §¬»³ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ º±® ¿²§ ¸»¿®·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ ³¿§ ²»»¼

¬± ¾» ¸»´¼ ¿¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½» °®»³·»ò

ïð Ó«´¬·°´» ½¿»


ì


ì

Ð´»¿» ®»¿¼ ¬¸» º±®³ ¿²¼ ½¸»½µ §±« ¸¿ª» »²¬»®»¼ ¿´´ ¬¸» ®»´»ª¿²¬ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²ò

Ñ²½» §±« ¿®» ¿¬·º·»¼ô °´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ò


½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¸¿ª» ³¿¼» ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®» «²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê

ø¿²¼ §±« ¸¿ª» ¹·ª»² §±«® ½±²»²¬ ¬¸¿¬ ©» ¸±«´¼ ¼± ±÷ »²¼ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ô ±® »¨¬®¿½¬ º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¬¸» ®»´»ª¿²¬

®»¹«´¿¬±®ò É» ©·´´ °«¬ ¬¸» ·²º±®³¿¬·±² §±« ¹·ª» « ±² ¬¸· º±®³ ±²¬± ¿ ½±³°«¬»®ò Ì¸· ¸»´° « ¬± ³±²·¬±® °®±¹®»

¿²¼ °®±¼«½» ¬¿¬·¬·½ò ×²º±®³¿¬·±² °®±ª·¼»¼ ±² ¬¸· º±®³ · °¿»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ º±® Þ«·²»ô ×²²±ª¿¬·±² ¿²¼

Íµ·´´ ¬± ¿·¬ ®»»¿®½¸ ·²¬± ¬¸» «» ¿²¼ »ºº»½¬·ª»²» ±º »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬®·¾«²¿´ò

ïï Ü»¬¿·´ ±º ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ Î»°±²¼»²¬

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ


Ó® Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±² øÓ¿²¿¹»® ±º ËÕ Ó¿²¿¹»®÷

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

Ó® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®» øÝÛÑ÷

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

ì

Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¬¸· ½´¿·³ ¬± Þ®·¬±´ Û³°´±§³»²¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´

ß¼¼®» ±ºæ






4) The parties to the proceedings before the employment tribunal, other than the appellant, were 1st Respondent EXSTO UK LTD 67 Roundponds, Melksham, Wiltshire 2nd Respondent Mr. J BAXEVANIDIS 3rd Respondent Mr J M PENELON 4th Respondent Mr C TORRES 5th Respondent Mr V BEZARD 5) Copies of—

(a) The written record of the employment tribunal’s judgment, and the written reasons of the employment tribunal; (b) The claim (ET1); (c) - are attached to this notice.



ï Ç±«® ¼»¬¿·´

ïòï Ì·¬´»æ Ó® Ó® Ó· Ó Ñ¬¸»®

ïòî Ú·®¬ ²¿³» ø±® ²¿³»÷æ

ïòí Í«®²¿³» ±® º¿³·´§ ²¿³»æ

ïòì Ü¿¬» ±º ¾·®¬¸ ø¼¿¬»ñ³±²¬¸ñ§»¿®÷æ ß®» §±«æ ³¿´»á º»³¿´»á

ïòë ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

ïòê Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»

ø©¸»®» ©» ½¿² ½±²¬¿½¬ §±« ·² ¬¸» ¼¿§ ¬·³»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ

ïòé Ø±© ©±«´¼ §±« °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ §±«áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ

îòï Ù·ª» ¬¸» ²¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®» ½´¿·³·²¹¿¹¿·²¬ò

îòî ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ


Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

×º ¬¸»®» ¿®» ±¬¸»® ®»°±²¼»²¬ °´»¿» ½±³°´»¬» Í»½¬·±² ïïò


î Î»°±²¼»²¬� ¼»¬¿·´

à


ì

Ü±«¹´¿ ×¿·²

Ù¿®¼·²»®


ë

É»¿ª»®² Ý±«®¬

Ý¸·°°»²¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïì ðÔË



ì

¼±«¹ò¹¿®¼·²»®à¬·½¿´·ò½±ò«µ

Ó® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· øÓ¿²¿¹»® Û¨¬± ËÕ÷

Û¨¬± ËÕ Ô¬¼

êé

Î±«²¼°±²¼

Ó»´µ¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïî èÛÞ


íòï Ð´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ·º °±·¾´»ò

É¸»² ¼·¼ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬¿®¬á

× §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ½±²¬·²«·²¹á Ç» Ò±

×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ ½»¿»¼ô ±® §±« ¿®» ·²

¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»ô ©¸»² ¼·¼ ·¬ô ±® ©·´´ ·¬ô »²¼á

íòî Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¶±¾ §±« ¼± ±® ¼·¼ò

ìòï Ø±© ³¿²§ ¸±«® ±² ¿ª»®¿¹» ¼±ô ±® ¼·¼ô §±« ©±®µ »¿½¸ ©»»µá ¸±«® »¿½¸ ©»»µ

ìòî Ø±© ³«½¸ ¿®»ô ±® ©»®»ô §±« °¿·¼á

Ð¿§ ¾»º±®» ¬¿¨ } ô òðð

Ò±®³¿´ ¬¿µ»ó¸±³» °¿§ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ } ô òðð

±ª»®¬·³»ô ½±³³··±²ô ¾±²«» ¿²¼ ± ±²÷

ìòí ×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ »²¼»¼ô ¼·¼ §±« ©±®µ

ø±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®÷ ¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»áÇ» Ò±

×º �Ç»�ô ¸±© ³¿²§ ©»»µ� ±® ³±²¬¸� ²±¬·½»

¼·¼ §±« ©±®µô ±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®á ©»»µ ³±²¬¸

ìòì É»®» §±« ·² §±«® »³°´±§»®� °»²·±² ½¸»³»á Ç» Ò±

Ð´»¿» ¿²©»® ìòë ¬± ìòç ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ô ±® °¿®¬ ±º ·¬ô · ¿¾±«¬ «²º¿·® ±® ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´ò

ìòë ×º §±« ®»½»·ª»¼ ¿²§ ±¬¸»® ¾»²»º·¬ô »ò¹ò ½±³°¿²§ ½¿®ô ³»¼·½¿´ ·²«®¿²½»ô »¬½ô º®±³ §±«®

»³°´±§»®ô °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¼»¬¿·´ò

ìòê Í·²½» ´»¿ª·²¹ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ª» §±« ¹±¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾á

×º �Ò±�ô °´»¿» ²±© ¹± ¬®¿·¹¸¬ ¬± »½¬·±² ìòçòÇ» Ò±

ìòé Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸»² §±« ¬¿®¬»¼ ø±® ©·´´ ¬¿®¬÷ ©±®µò



í Û³°´±§³»²¬ ¼»¬¿·´

Ø±«®´§

É»»µ´§

Ó±²¬¸´§

Ç»¿®´§

ì Û¿®²·²¹ ¿²¼ ¾»²»º·¬



ì

Ü»·¹² Ó¿²¿¹»®

íéòë

íðçð

îîçíì

ì

ì

Ë²½´»¿®

ì

ìòè Ð´»¿» ¿§ ¸±© ³«½¸ §±« ¿®» ²±© »¿®²·²¹ ø±® ©·´´ »¿®²÷ò } ô òðð »¿½¸

ìòç Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¬± ¿§ ©¸¿¬ §±« ©¿²¬ ·º §±«® ½¿» · «½½»º«´æ

¿ Ì± ¹»¬ §±«® ±´¼ ¶±¾ ¾¿½µ ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»·²¬¿¬»³»²¬÷

¾ Ì± ¹»¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¿³» »³°´±§»® ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»ó»²¹¿¹»³»²¬÷

½ Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ±²´§

ëòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²» ±® ³±®» ±º ¬¸» ¾±¨» ¾»´±©ò ×² ¬¸» °¿½» °®±ª·¼»¼ô ¼»½®·¾» ¬¸» »ª»²¬ô

±® »®·» ±º »ª»²¬ô ¬¸¿¬ ¸¿ª» ½¿«»¼ §±« ¬± ³¿µ» ¬¸· ½´¿·³æ

¿ × ©¿ «²º¿·®´§ ¼·³·»¼ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´÷

¾ × ©¿ ¼·½®·³·²¿¬»¼ ¿¹¿·²¬ ±² ¬¸» ¹®±«²¼ ±º

½ × ¿³ ½´¿·³·²¹ ¿ ®»¼«²¼¿²½§ °¿§³»²¬

¼ × ¿³ ±©»¼

» Ñ¬¸»® ½±³°´¿·²¬

ëòî Ð´»¿» »¬ ±«¬ ¬¸» ¾¿½µ¹®±«²¼ ¿²¼ ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ·² ¬¸» °¿½» ¾»´±©ò

Ì¸» ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ¸±«´¼ ·²½´«¼» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ©¸»² ¬¸» »ª»²¬ø÷ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹

¿¾±«¬ ¸¿°°»²»¼å º±® »¨¿³°´»ô ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ ®»´¿¬» ¬± ¼·½®·³·²¿¬·±² ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¿´´

¬¸» ·²½·¼»²¬ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹ ¿¾±«¬ô ±® ¿¬ ´»¿¬ ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ´¿¬ ·²½·¼»²¬ò ×º §±«®

½±³°´¿·²¬ · ¿¾±«¬ °¿§³»²¬ §±« ¿®» ±©»¼ °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» °»®·±¼ ½±ª»®»¼ò

Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ë Ç±«® ½´¿·³

²±¬·½» °¿§

¸±´·¼¿§ °¿§

¿®®»¿® ±º °¿§

±¬¸»® °¿§³»²¬

Í»¨ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ »¯«¿´ °¿§÷

Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

Í»¨«¿´ ±®·»²¬¿¬·±²

Î¿½»

Î»´·¹·±² ±® ¾»´·»º

ß¹»


ð

ì

ì

ì ì

ì

ì

ì

ß½¬·±² ïð¬¸ ó ïë¬¸ ±º Ü»½»³¾»® îðïðÑ² ¬¸» ïí¬¸ ±º Ü»½ × ª··¬ ¬¸» °®¿½¬·½» ½±«²½·´±® ©¸± ¿»»¼ ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±²× ¿¬¬»³°¬»¼ ¬± ½±²¬¿½¬ ¬¸» °»®±²²»´ ¼»°¿®¬³»²¬ ¿¬ Û¨¬± ¾«¬ ©¿ ·¹²±®»¼ò × ¿°°±·²¬»¼ ¿ ³»¼·¿¬±®ï÷Ñ² ¬¸»ïì¬¸ Ü»½ × ®»½»·ª» ¿² »ó³¿·´ º®±³ ¿ ½±³°¿²§ ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª» Ê·²½»²¬ Þ»¦¿®¼þ©¸¿¬ ¬¸» º«½µ · ¬¸» °¿©±®¼ ±² ¬¸¿¬ ½±³°«¬»®ô ¬¸¿¬ù ¾¿¼ ³¿¬»þ ÉØÑÔÔÇ ×ÒÌÑÔÛÎßÞÔÛô×ÒßÐÐÎÑÐÎ×ßÌÛô ØËÎÌÚËÔ ßÒÜ ÑÚÚÛÒÍ×ÊÛ «²¼»® ¿²§ ½·®½«³¬¿²½»ô »ª»² ©±®» ½±²·¼»®·²¹ × ¸¿¼¾»»² ¾«´´·»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» ½±³°¿²§ ¿²¼ ³§ ³»²¬¿´ ¬¿¬» ±º ¸»¿´¬¸òî÷ïë¬¸ Ü»½ Ñ² ½¸»½µ·²¹ ³§ ¾¿²µ ¿½½±«²¬ × º·²¼ ¿ ¸±®¬ º¿´´ ¬± ³§ ¿´¿®§ô ±² ·²ª»¬·¹¿¬·±² × º·²¼ ¬¸»®» ¿®»©·¬¸±«¬ ¿²§ ²±¬·º·½¿¬·±² ±® ¿¹®»»³»²¬ «²¿«¬¸±®·¦»¼ ¼»¼«½¬·±² ¿²¼ ¿´¬»®¿¬·±² ³¿¼» ¬± ³§ ¿´¿®§òÚ±® ³¿µ·²¹ ¿ ½±³°´¿·²¬ «²¼»® ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¿½¬ × ©¿ ²±© ¾»·²¹ §¬»³¿¬·½¿´´§ ª·½¬·³·»¼ ¾§ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·í÷Ú±®³¿´ ¼·½·°´·²¿®§ °®±½»¼«®» ¿¹¿·² ©»®» ²±¬ º±´´±©»¼ × ©¿ ¼»²·»¼ ¿ º¿·® ¬®·¿´ì÷Ì¸» ³¿²¿¹»® × ¸¿¼ ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©·¬¸ ©¿ ´»º¬ ·² ½±²¬®±´ ±º ³§ ©»´º¿®» Ó Ù¿´´¿²¼ ·¹²±®»¼ ³§ ³¿·´ ¿²¼ ¼·¼²±¬ ·³°´»³»²¬ ½±³°¿²§ °®±½»¼«®»ò Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ¸¿¼ ¬¿¬»¼ þ× ½¿² ¿½µ §±« ¿´´ ©¸»²»ª»® × ´·µ»ô ©·¬¸±«¬½¿´´·²¹ ¿²§¾±¼§ ·²þë÷ Ó§ ¸»¿´¬¸ ¸¿ ¾»»² »®·±«´§ ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸»» ¿½¬·±²ñ·²¿½¬·±²ê÷ Ó§ ¬®«¬ ¿²¼ ½±²º·¼»²½» ·² ³§ »³°´±§»® ¸¿ ¾»»² ¼»¬®±§»¼ ¿º¬»® ³¿²§ ¹±±¼ §»¿® »®ª·½»

ì

ëòí ×º §±«® ½´¿·³ ½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¿®» ³¿µ·²¹ ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®»

«²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê ø±¬¸»®©·» µ²±©² ¿ ¿ �©¸·¬´»¾´±©·²¹� ½´¿·³÷ô

°´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¾»´±© ·º §±« ©·¸ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸· º±®³ô ±® ·²º±®³¿¬·±² º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¾»

º±®©¿®¼»¼ ±² §±«® ¾»¸¿´º ¬± ¿ ®»´»ª¿²¬ ®»¹«´¿¬±® øµ²±©² ¿ ¿ �°®»½®·¾»¼ °»®±²� «²¼»® ¬¸»

®»´»ª¿²¬ ´»¹·´¿¬·±²÷ ¾§ ¬¸» Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½»ò

êòï Ý±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¬¸· »½¬·±² · ±°¬·±²¿´ô ¾«¬ ³¿§ ¸»´° ·º §±« ¬¿¬» ©¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±®

®»³»¼§ §±« ¿®» »»µ·²¹ º®±³ §±«® »³°´±§»® ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ ±º ¬¸· ½±³°´¿·²¬ò ×º §±« °»½·º§

¿² ¿³±«²¬ô °´»¿» »¨°´¿·² ¸±© §±« ¸¿ª» ½¿´½«´¿¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ º·¹«®»ò

éòï Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¿ ½±ª»®·²¹ ´»¬¬»® ©·¬¸ ¬¸· º±®³ò Ç±« ¸±«´¼ ¿¼¼ ¿²§ »¨¬®¿ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²

§±« ©¿²¬ « ¬± µ²±© ¸»®»ò Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ê É¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±® ®»³»¼§ ¿®» §±« »»µ·²¹á

é Ñ¬¸»® ·²º±®³¿¬·±²


Ý±³°´¿·²¬ ±ºÝ±²¬®«½¬·ª» Ü·³·¿´Ø¿®¿³»²¬Ê·½¬·³·¿¬·±²×²º®·²¹»³»²¬ ±º ¸«³¿² ®·¹¸¬ß² «²½´»¿® °¿§ ´·°ëòë Ø® ±º «²¿«¬¸±®·»¼ ¿¾»²½»í ¼¿§ «²¿«¬¸±®·»¼ ¿¾»²½»íòë ¸±«® ±º ±ª»®¬·³» ·º ¬¸· · ¬¸» ½¿» ¬¸» ³·²·³«³ ¿³±«²¬ × ½±«´¼ ¶«¬·º§ ©±«´¼ ¾» ìðð ¸®¾«¬ ¬¸» ®»¿´ ¿³±«²¬ ©±«´¼ ¾» ²»¿®»® ïëðð

Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ïë §»¿® ±º ´± ±º ¿´¿®§ ïë ¨ }íêôððð ã }ëìðôðððí ¼¿§ Ð¿§ëòë ¸® °¿§ ¬®»¿¬»¼ ¿ «²¿«¬¸±®·»¼ ¿¾»²½» ¼»¼«½¬»¼ ©·¬¸ ²± ¶«¬·º·½¿¬·±² ©¸¿¬±»ª»® ¿º¬»® ·¬ ©¿ ¿¹®»»¼ ×©¿ ·½µ ¿²¼ ½±«´¼ ¹± ¸±³»ìðð ¸±«® ±º ±ª»® ¬·³»Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ·²¶«®§ ¬± º»»´·²¹ ïèôððð


Ð´»¿» º·´´ ·² ¬¸· »½¬·±² ±²´§ ·º §±« ¸¿ª» ¿°°±·²¬»¼ ¿ ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»ò ×º §±« ¼± º·´´ ·² ¬¸·

»½¬·±²ô ©» ©·´´ ·² º«¬«®» ±²´§ »²¼ ½±®®»°±²¼»²½» ¬± §±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª» ¿²¼ ²±¬ ¬± §±«ò

èòï Î»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»� ²¿³»æ

èòî Ò¿³» ±º ¬¸» ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»�

±®¹¿²·¿¬·±²æ

èòí ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

èòì Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ


èòê Ø±© ©±«´¼ ¬¸»§ °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ ¬¸»³áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ


è Ç±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»

à

ç Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

çòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ ·º §±« ½±²·¼»® §±« ¸¿ª» ¿ ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ Ç»Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¬¸· ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ · ¿²¼ ¬»´´ « ©¸¿¬ ¿·¬¿²½»ô ·º ¿²§ô §±« ©·´´ ²»»¼ ¿

§±«® ½´¿·³ °®±¹®»» ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» §¬»³ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ º±® ¿²§ ¸»¿®·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ ³¿§ ²»»¼

¬± ¾» ¸»´¼ ¿¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½» °®»³·»ò

ïð Ó«´¬·°´» ½¿»


ì


ì

Ð´»¿» ®»¿¼ ¬¸» º±®³ ¿²¼ ½¸»½µ §±« ¸¿ª» »²¬»®»¼ ¿´´ ¬¸» ®»´»ª¿²¬ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²ò

Ñ²½» §±« ¿®» ¿¬·º·»¼ô °´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ò


½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¸¿ª» ³¿¼» ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®» «²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê

ø¿²¼ §±« ¸¿ª» ¹·ª»² §±«® ½±²»²¬ ¬¸¿¬ ©» ¸±«´¼ ¼± ±÷ »²¼ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ô ±® »¨¬®¿½¬ º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¬¸» ®»´»ª¿²¬

®»¹«´¿¬±®ò É» ©·´´ °«¬ ¬¸» ·²º±®³¿¬·±² §±« ¹·ª» « ±² ¬¸· º±®³ ±²¬± ¿ ½±³°«¬»®ò Ì¸· ¸»´° « ¬± ³±²·¬±® °®±¹®»

¿²¼ °®±¼«½» ¬¿¬·¬·½ò ×²º±®³¿¬·±² °®±ª·¼»¼ ±² ¬¸· º±®³ · °¿»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ º±® Þ«·²»ô ×²²±ª¿¬·±² ¿²¼

Íµ·´´ ¬± ¿·¬ ®»»¿®½¸ ·²¬± ¬¸» «» ¿²¼ »ºº»½¬·ª»²» ±º »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬®·¾«²¿´ò

ïï Ü»¬¿·´ ±º ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ Î»°±²¼»²¬

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ


Ó® Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±² øÓ¿²¿¹»® ±º ËÕ Ó¿²¿¹»®÷

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

Ó® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®» øÝÛÑ÷

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

Ê·²½»²¬ Þ»¦¿®¼

Û¨¬± ËÕ Ô¬¼

ì

Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¬¸· ½´¿·³ ¬± Þ®·¬±´ Û³°´±§³»²¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´

ß¼¼®» ±ºæ


ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ Î»°±²¼»²¬

Ó Ù¿´´¿²¼ Ð»®±²²»´ Ó¿²¿¹»® Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

Ð»²·²«´¿ Þ«·²» Í»®ª·½» Ô¬¼î Ý¸»»¬¸¿³ Ø·´´ Î±¿¼Ó¿²½¸»¬»®Óì ìÚÞ

ì

ì

ì

ì

ì

ØÑÒÛÍÌÇ

Ý´·½µ Ø»®» ¬± ®»¬«®² ¬± ¬¸» Ø±³» °¿¹» ©¸»² §±« ¸¿ª» º·²·¸»¼ ½±³°´»¬·²¹ ¬¸» º±®³





4) The parties to the proceedings before the employment tribunal, other than the appellant, were 1st Respondent EXSTO UK LTD 67 Roundponds, Melksham, Wiltshire 2nd Respondent Mr. J BAXEVANIDIS 3rd Respondent Mr J M PENELON 4th Respondent Mr C TORRES 5th Respondent Ms M GALLAND 6th Respondent Peninsular Business Services

5) Copies of— (a) The written record of the employment tribunal’s judgment, and the written reasons of the employment tribunal; (b) The claim (ET1); (c) - are attached to this notice.



ï Ç±«® ¼»¬¿·´

ïòï Ì·¬´»æ Ó® Ó® Ó· Ó Ñ¬¸»®

ïòî Ú·®¬ ²¿³» ø±® ²¿³»÷æ

ïòí Í«®²¿³» ±® º¿³·´§ ²¿³»æ

ïòì Ü¿¬» ±º ¾·®¬¸ ø¼¿¬»ñ³±²¬¸ñ§»¿®÷æ ß®» §±«æ ³¿´»á º»³¿´»á

ïòë ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

ïòê Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»

ø©¸»®» ©» ½¿² ½±²¬¿½¬ §±« ·² ¬¸» ¼¿§ ¬·³»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ

ïòé Ø±© ©±«´¼ §±« °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ §±«áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ

îòï Ù·ª» ¬¸» ²¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®» ½´¿·³·²¹¿¹¿·²¬ò

îòî ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ


Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

×º ¬¸»®» ¿®» ±¬¸»® ®»°±²¼»²¬ °´»¿» ½±³°´»¬» Í»½¬·±² ïïò


î Î»°±²¼»²¬� ¼»¬¿·´

à


ì

Ü±«¹´¿ ×¿·²

Ù¿®¼·²»®


ë

É»¿ª»®² Ý±«®¬

Ý¸·°°»²¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïì ðÔË



ì

¼±«¹ò¹¿®¼·²»®à¬·½¿´·ò½±ò«µ

Ó® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· øÓ¿²¿¹»® Û¨¬± ËÕ÷

Û¨¬± ËÕ Ô¬¼

êé

Î±«²¼°±²¼

Ó»´µ¸¿³

É·´¬¸·®»

ÍÒïî èÛÞ


íòï Ð´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» º±´´±©·²¹ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ·º °±·¾´»ò

É¸»² ¼·¼ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬¿®¬á

× §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ½±²¬·²«·²¹á Ç» Ò±

×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ ½»¿»¼ô ±® §±« ¿®» ·²

¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»ô ©¸»² ¼·¼ ·¬ô ±® ©·´´ ·¬ô »²¼á

íòî Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¶±¾ §±« ¼± ±® ¼·¼ò

ìòï Ø±© ³¿²§ ¸±«® ±² ¿ª»®¿¹» ¼±ô ±® ¼·¼ô §±« ©±®µ »¿½¸ ©»»µá ¸±«® »¿½¸ ©»»µ

ìòî Ø±© ³«½¸ ¿®»ô ±® ©»®»ô §±« °¿·¼á

Ð¿§ ¾»º±®» ¬¿¨ } ô òðð

Ò±®³¿´ ¬¿µ»ó¸±³» °¿§ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ } ô òðð

±ª»®¬·³»ô ½±³³··±²ô ¾±²«» ¿²¼ ± ±²÷

ìòí ×º §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ »²¼»¼ô ¼·¼ §±« ©±®µ

ø±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®÷ ¿ °»®·±¼ ±º ²±¬·½»áÇ» Ò±

×º �Ç»�ô ¸±© ³¿²§ ©»»µ� ±® ³±²¬¸� ²±¬·½»

¼·¼ §±« ©±®µô ±® ©»®» §±« °¿·¼ º±®á ©»»µ ³±²¬¸

ìòì É»®» §±« ·² §±«® »³°´±§»®� °»²·±² ½¸»³»á Ç» Ò±

Ð´»¿» ¿²©»® ìòë ¬± ìòç ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ô ±® °¿®¬ ±º ·¬ô · ¿¾±«¬ «²º¿·® ±® ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´ò

ìòë ×º §±« ®»½»·ª»¼ ¿²§ ±¬¸»® ¾»²»º·¬ô »ò¹ò ½±³°¿²§ ½¿®ô ³»¼·½¿´ ·²«®¿²½»ô »¬½ô º®±³ §±«®

»³°´±§»®ô °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¼»¬¿·´ò

ìòê Í·²½» ´»¿ª·²¹ §±«® »³°´±§³»²¬ ¸¿ª» §±« ¹±¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾á

×º �Ò±�ô °´»¿» ²±© ¹± ¬®¿·¹¸¬ ¬± »½¬·±² ìòçòÇ» Ò±

ìòé Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸»² §±« ¬¿®¬»¼ ø±® ©·´´ ¬¿®¬÷ ©±®µò



í Û³°´±§³»²¬ ¼»¬¿·´

Ø±«®´§

É»»µ´§

Ó±²¬¸´§

Ç»¿®´§

ì Û¿®²·²¹ ¿²¼ ¾»²»º·¬



ì

Ü»·¹² Ó¿²¿¹»®

íéòë

íðçð

îîçíì

ì

ì

Ë²½´»¿®

ì

ìòè Ð´»¿» ¿§ ¸±© ³«½¸ §±« ¿®» ²±© »¿®²·²¹ ø±® ©·´´ »¿®²÷ò } ô òðð »¿½¸

ìòç Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¬± ¿§ ©¸¿¬ §±« ©¿²¬ ·º §±«® ½¿» · «½½»º«´æ

¿ Ì± ¹»¬ §±«® ±´¼ ¶±¾ ¾¿½µ ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»·²¬¿¬»³»²¬÷

¾ Ì± ¹»¬ ¿²±¬¸»® ¶±¾ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¿³» »³°´±§»® ¿²¼ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ø®»ó»²¹¿¹»³»²¬÷

½ Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ±²´§

ëòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²» ±® ³±®» ±º ¬¸» ¾±¨» ¾»´±©ò ×² ¬¸» °¿½» °®±ª·¼»¼ô ¼»½®·¾» ¬¸» »ª»²¬ô

±® »®·» ±º »ª»²¬ô ¬¸¿¬ ¸¿ª» ½¿«»¼ §±« ¬± ³¿µ» ¬¸· ½´¿·³æ

¿ × ©¿ «²º¿·®´§ ¼·³·»¼ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ½±²¬®«½¬·ª» ¼·³·¿´÷

¾ × ©¿ ¼·½®·³·²¿¬»¼ ¿¹¿·²¬ ±² ¬¸» ¹®±«²¼ ±º

½ × ¿³ ½´¿·³·²¹ ¿ ®»¼«²¼¿²½§ °¿§³»²¬

¼ × ¿³ ±©»¼

» Ñ¬¸»® ½±³°´¿·²¬

ëòî Ð´»¿» »¬ ±«¬ ¬¸» ¾¿½µ¹®±«²¼ ¿²¼ ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ·² ¬¸» °¿½» ¾»´±©ò

Ì¸» ¼»¬¿·´ ±º §±«® ½´¿·³ ¸±«´¼ ·²½´«¼» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ©¸»² ¬¸» »ª»²¬ø÷ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹

¿¾±«¬ ¸¿°°»²»¼å º±® »¨¿³°´»ô ·º §±«® ½´¿·³ ®»´¿¬» ¬± ¼·½®·³·²¿¬·±² ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¿´´

¬¸» ·²½·¼»²¬ §±« ¿®» ½±³°´¿·²·²¹ ¿¾±«¬ô ±® ¿¬ ´»¿¬ ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» ´¿¬ ·²½·¼»²¬ò ×º §±«®

½±³°´¿·²¬ · ¿¾±«¬ °¿§³»²¬ §±« ¿®» ±©»¼ °´»¿» ¹·ª» ¬¸» ¼¿¬» ±º ¬¸» °»®·±¼ ½±ª»®»¼ò

Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ë Ç±«® ½´¿·³

²±¬·½» °¿§

¸±´·¼¿§ °¿§

¿®®»¿® ±º °¿§

±¬¸»® °¿§³»²¬

Í»¨ ø·²½´«¼·²¹ »¯«¿´ °¿§÷

Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

Í»¨«¿´ ±®·»²¬¿¬·±²

Î¿½»

Î»´·¹·±² ±® ¾»´·»º

ß¹»


ð

ì

ì

ì ì

ì

ì

ì

ì

ì

ì

ïê¬¸ ±º Ü»½»³¾»® ó ïì¬¸ ±º Ö¿²«¿®§ îðïð ó ïïïê¬¸ Ü»½ï÷ ×² «²¼¿¬»¼ ´»¬¬»® ·² ®»°±²» ¬± ³§ ®»¯«»¬ º±® ½´¿®·º·½¿¬·±² ±º ³§ °¿§´·° ©¸·½¸ × ¸¿¼ ®»½»·ª»¼ ¾§ »ó³¿·´Ó® ¾¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ¸¿ ©®·¬¬»² ¸· ¿½½±«²¬ ø¬± ©¸·½¸ × ²»ª»® ¿¹®»»¼ ±® ¿½½»°¬»¼÷ ±º ©¸¿¬ ¸¿°°»²»¼ ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸»¾«´´§·²¹ »·±²¿÷ ×¬ ¸¿ ¾»½±³» ¿ ³»»¬·²¹¾÷ Ø» ³¿µ» º¿´» ¯«±¬¿¬·±² ¿²¼ ½±²¬®«½¬·ª»´§ ¼·³·» ³» ¾§ º¿´»´§ ¬¿¬·²¹ þ¬±®³»¼ ±«¬ ±º ¬¸» ¾«·´¼·²¹þ¬¸· ©¿ ²±¬ ¬¸» ½¿» × ©¿ ·½µ ¿²¼ × ¸¿¼ ´»º¬ ©·¬¸ ¸· ¿¹®»»³»²¬þÚ±® ³¿µ·²¹ ¿ ½±³°´¿·²¬ «²¼»® ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¿½¬ × ©¿ ²±© ¾»·²¹ §¬»³¿¬·½¿´´§ ª·½¬·³·»¼ ¾§ Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·î÷Ú±®³¿´ ¼·½·°´·²¿®§ °®±½»¼«®» ¿¹¿·² ©»®» ²±¬ º±´´±©»¼ × ©¿ ¼»²·»¼ ¿ º¿·® ¬®·¿´í÷Ì¸» ³¿²¿¹»® × ¸¿¼ ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©·¬¸ ©¿ ´»º¬ ·² ½±²¬®±´ ±º ³§ ©»´º¿®» Ó Ù¿´´¿²¼ ·¹²±®»¼ ³§ ³¿·´ ¿²¼ ¼·¼²±¬ ·³°´»³»²¬ ½±³°¿²§ °®±½»¼«®»ò Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ¸¿¼ ¬¿¬»¼ þ× ½¿² ¿½µ §±« ¿´´ ©¸»²»ª»® × ´·µ»ô ©·¬¸±«¬½¿´´·²¹ ¿²§¾±¼§ ·²þì÷ Ó§ ¸»¿´¬¸ ¸¿ ¾»»² »®·±«´§ ¿ºº»½¬»¼ ¾§ ¬¸»» ¿½¬·±²ñ·²¿½¬·±²ë÷ Ó§ ¬®«¬ ¿²¼ ½±²º·¼»²½» ·² ³§ »³°´±§»® ¸¿ ¾»»² ¼»¬®±§»¼ ¿º¬»® ³¿²§ ¹±±¼ §»¿® »®ª·½»

ì

ëòí ×º §±«® ½´¿·³ ½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¿®» ³¿µ·²¹ ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®»

«²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê ø±¬¸»®©·» µ²±©² ¿ ¿ �©¸·¬´»¾´±©·²¹� ½´¿·³÷ô

°´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸» ¾±¨ ¾»´±© ·º §±« ©·¸ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸· º±®³ô ±® ·²º±®³¿¬·±² º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¾»

º±®©¿®¼»¼ ±² §±«® ¾»¸¿´º ¬± ¿ ®»´»ª¿²¬ ®»¹«´¿¬±® øµ²±©² ¿ ¿ �°®»½®·¾»¼ °»®±²� «²¼»® ¬¸»

®»´»ª¿²¬ ´»¹·´¿¬·±²÷ ¾§ ¬¸» Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½»ò

êòï Ý±³°´»¬·±² ±º ¬¸· »½¬·±² · ±°¬·±²¿´ô ¾«¬ ³¿§ ¸»´° ·º §±« ¬¿¬» ©¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±®

®»³»¼§ §±« ¿®» »»µ·²¹ º®±³ §±«® »³°´±§»® ¿ ¿ ®»«´¬ ±º ¬¸· ½±³°´¿·²¬ò ×º §±« °»½·º§

¿² ¿³±«²¬ô °´»¿» »¨°´¿·² ¸±© §±« ¸¿ª» ½¿´½«´¿¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ º·¹«®»ò

éòï Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¿ ½±ª»®·²¹ ´»¬¬»® ©·¬¸ ¬¸· º±®³ò Ç±« ¸±«´¼ ¿¼¼ ¿²§ »¨¬®¿ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²

§±« ©¿²¬ « ¬± µ²±© ¸»®»ò Ð´»¿» «» ¬¸» ¾´¿²µ ¸»»¬ ¿¬ ¬¸» »²¼ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ ·º ²»»¼»¼ò

ê É¸¿¬ ½±³°»²¿¬·±² ±® ®»³»¼§ ¿®» §±« »»µ·²¹á

é Ñ¬¸»® ·²º±®³¿¬·±²


îï¬ Ü»½ Ó§ Ü® ®»¿»» ³§ ½±²¼·¬·±² ¿ ¬®» ¿²¼ ¬¿¬» × ¿³ «²º·¬ ¬± ©±®µ º±® ¿ º«®¬¸»® ³±²¬¸ ¾«¬ ³¿§¸¿ª» ¿ °¸¿»¼ ®»¬«®² ¿²¼ ¿³»²¼»¼ ¼«¬·»òîí®¼ Ü»½ × ®»½»·ª» ¿² «²¼»·®»¼ »ó³¿·´ º®±³ Ó® Ö±¸² Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼· ©¸·½¸ ¾¿·½¿´´§ ¿§ ¼± ²±¬ ®»¬«®² ¬± ©±®µ«²¬·´ §±« ¿®» º«´´§ ïððû º·¬ ¬± °»®º±®³ §±«® ¶±¾ïð¬¸ Ö¿²«¿®§ îðïï × «¾³·¬ ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ´»¬¬»® ¬± ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® ·² Ú®¿²½» øÓ® Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±²÷ ±º ¬¸»³¿²¿¹»® ±º Û¨¬± ËÕ òïî¬¸ Ö¿² × ®»½»·ª» ¿² «²¼»·®»¼ »ó³¿·´ º®±³ ¬¸» ³¿²¿¹»® × ¸¿ª» ¿ ®»¹·¬»®»¼ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©·¬¸òïí¬¸ Ö¿² ³¿·ª» ¿´¬»®¿¬·±² ¿®» ³¿¼» ¬± ³§ ¿´¿®§ ©·¬¸±«¬ ¿²§ ²±¬·º·½¿¬·±² ¼»°·¬» ¬¸» º¿½¬ × ¸¿ª» ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½»·² °®±½» ¿²¼ × ¿³ «ºº»®·²¹ º®±³ ¬®»ò ×²½´«¼·²¹ ¿² «²¼»®°¿§³»²¬ ±º }ìðð ¼«» ¬± ¿ ¬¿¨ »®®±® ß¬ ¬¸· °±·²¬ ×©¿ ®»²¼»®»¼ ¬±¬¿´´§ «²º·¬ ¬± ®»¬«®² ¬± ©±®µòîð¬¸ Ö¿² × ¸¿ª» ¿ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ¸»¿®·²¹ ©·¬¸±«¬ °®±°»® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·±² ³§ °±±® ¸»¿´¬¸ · ¿´± ¼±«¾¬»¼îï¬ Ö¿² × «¾³·¬ ¿ î²¼ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ½±²½»®²·²¹ º·²¼·²¹ ¿²¼ ½±²¼«½¬ ¿®··²¹ ¼«®·²¹ ¬¸» ½±³°·´·²¹ ±º ³§ º·®¬¹®·»ª¿²½» Ü® ¿¼ª·» «²º·¬ º±® ©±®µ º±® ±²» ³±²¬¸ ¬®»òç¬¸ Ú»¾ × ®»½»·ª» ½±²½´«·±² ´»¬¬»® ¬± ï¬ ú î²¼ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ·´´»¹¿´ ¿½¬·±² ¶«¬·º·»¼òïï¬¸ Ú»¾ Ü® «²º·¬ º±® ©±®µ º±® ±²» ³±²¬¸ ¬®»ô ¼»°®»·±² ú ¿²¨·»¬§òïî¬¸ Ú»¾ × Í«¾³·¬ ¿² ¿°°»¿´ ¬± ¬¸» ½±²½´«·±² ´»¬¬»® ¬± Ì¸» Û¨¬± ÝÛÑ øÓ® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®»÷òîë¬¸ Ú»¾ × ¿³ ±ºº»®»¼ ¿² ¿°°»¿´ ¸»¿®·²¹ ¼¿¬» ±º ç¬¸ Ó¿®½¸ »¨¿½¬´§ í ³±²¬¸ ¿º¬»® ¬¸» ¾«´´§·²¹ ·²½·¼»²¬òîè¬¸ Ú»¾ × ®»·¹²»¼ ¿ ¬®«¬ ¿²¼ ½±²º·¼»²½» ©·¬¸ ³§ »³°´±§»® · ¬±¬¿´´§ ¾®±µ»²í®¼ Ó¿® × ®»½»·ª» ¿ ´»¬¬»® ½±³°±»¼ ±² ¾»¸¿´º ±º ¬¸» ÝÛÑ ±º Û¨¬± øÓ® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®»÷ ±ºº»®·²¹ ³±®» ¬·³»¼»´¿§·²¹ ±°¬·±²ò ×²½´«¼·²¹ ¿ °¸®¿» ®»º»®®·²¹ ¬± ®»¼«²¼¿²½§é¬¸ Ó¿® × ®»½±²·¼»® ³§ ®»·¹²¿¬·±² ¿¬ ¬¸» ©·¸ ±º Ó® Ì±®®» ¾«¬ ¬¸· ·¼»¿ · ¯«·½µ´§ ¯«¿¸»¼ ©¸»²«²®»¿±²¿¾´» ¬·³» ´·³·¬ ¿®» ·³°±»¼ «°±² ³»òç¬¸ Ó¿®½¸ × ¿¬¬»²¼ Ó® Ì±®®» ©¸·¬» ©¿¸ ¿°°»¿´ ³»»¬·²¹ ·² ©¸·½¸ ¸» ¿¹®»» ¬¸» ³»³±®¿²¼«³ · «°»®»¼»¼¬¸» ²±¬» ±º ¬¸» ³»»¬·²¹ ¿®» ®»¬«®²»¼ ¬± Ó® Þ¿¨»ª¿²·¼·ïé¬¸ Ó¿®½¸ Ó® Ì±®®» ½¿´´ ³» ¿²¼ · ±ª»®´§ º®·»²¼´§ ½±²¬¿²¬´§ ®»°»¿¬·²¹ ¸·³»´ºô × «²¼»®¬¿²¼ ©¸¿¬ ©±®¼ ¸»¿§·²¹ ¾«¬ × ¼± ²±¬ «²¼»®¬¿²¼ ©¸¿¬ ¸» ³»¿² ó ¸» ¼·¼ ·²ª·¬» ³» ¬± °´¿§ ¹±´º

Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² ïë §»¿® ±º ´± ±º ¿´¿®§ ïë ¨ }íêôððð ã }ëìðôððð×²¶«®§ ¬± º»»´·²¹ }ïèôðððË²°¿·¼ ·½µ °¿§ ï ©»»µ º±® ¬¸» §»¿® ¾»¹·²²·²¹ ß°®·´ îðïïØ±´·¼¿§ °¿§ é ¼¿§ º±® îðïðØ±´·¼¿§ °¿§ îë ¼¿§ º±® ¬¸» §»¿® îðïïë ³±²¬¸ ±º ¿²²«¿´ ¾±²« º±® ¬¸» §»¿® »²¼»¼ îðïïÒ±¬·½» °¿§ Ý±³°»²¿¬·±² «²½´»¿® °¿§ ´·° ¨ í Þ¿·½ ¿©¿®¼ ó Ë°´·º¬ îëû


Ð´»¿» º·´´ ·² ¬¸· »½¬·±² ±²´§ ·º §±« ¸¿ª» ¿°°±·²¬»¼ ¿ ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»ò ×º §±« ¼± º·´´ ·² ¬¸·

»½¬·±²ô ©» ©·´´ ·² º«¬«®» ±²´§ »²¼ ½±®®»°±²¼»²½» ¬± §±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª» ¿²¼ ²±¬ ¬± §±«ò

èòï Î»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»� ²¿³»æ

èòî Ò¿³» ±º ¬¸» ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»�

±®¹¿²·¿¬·±²æ

èòí ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

èòì Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»® ø·²½´«¼·²¹ ¿®»¿ ½±¼»÷æ

Ó±¾·´» ²«³¾»® ø·º ¼·ºº»®»²¬÷æ


èòê Ø±© ©±«´¼ ¬¸»§ °®»º»® « ¬± Ûó³¿·´ Ð±¬½±³³«²·½¿¬» ©·¬¸ ¬¸»³áøÐ´»¿» ¬·½µ ±²´§ ±²» ¾±¨÷

Ûó³¿·´ ¿¼¼®»æ


è Ç±«® ®»°®»»²¬¿¬·ª»

à

ç Ü·¿¾·´·¬§

çòï Ð´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ ·º §±« ½±²·¼»® §±« ¸¿ª» ¿ ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ Ç»Ð´»¿» ¿§ ©¸¿¬ ¬¸· ¼·¿¾·´·¬§ · ¿²¼ ¬»´´ « ©¸¿¬ ¿·¬¿²½»ô ·º ¿²§ô §±« ©·´´ ²»»¼ ¿

§±«® ½´¿·³ °®±¹®»» ¬¸®±«¹¸ ¬¸» §¬»³ô ·²½´«¼·²¹ º±® ¿²§ ¸»¿®·²¹ ¬¸¿¬ ³¿§ ²»»¼

¬± ¾» ¸»´¼ ¿¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´ Í»®ª·½» °®»³·»ò

ïð Ó«´¬·°´» ½¿»


ì


ì

Ð´»¿» ®»¿¼ ¬¸» º±®³ ¿²¼ ½¸»½µ §±« ¸¿ª» »²¬»®»¼ ¿´´ ¬¸» ®»´»ª¿²¬ ·²º±®³¿¬·±²ò

Ñ²½» §±« ¿®» ¿¬·º·»¼ô °´»¿» ¬·½µ ¬¸· ¾±¨ò


½±²·¬ ±ºô ±® ·²½´«¼»ô ¿ ½´¿·³ ¬¸¿¬ §±« ¸¿ª» ³¿¼» ¿ °®±¬»½¬»¼ ¼·½´±«®» «²¼»® ¬¸» Û³°´±§³»²¬ Î·¹¸¬ ß½¬ ïççê

ø¿²¼ §±« ¸¿ª» ¹·ª»² §±«® ½±²»²¬ ¬¸¿¬ ©» ¸±«´¼ ¼± ±÷ »²¼ ¿ ½±°§ ±º ¬¸» º±®³ô ±® »¨¬®¿½¬ º®±³ ·¬ô ¬± ¬¸» ®»´»ª¿²¬

®»¹«´¿¬±®ò É» ©·´´ °«¬ ¬¸» ·²º±®³¿¬·±² §±« ¹·ª» « ±² ¬¸· º±®³ ±²¬± ¿ ½±³°«¬»®ò Ì¸· ¸»´° « ¬± ³±²·¬±® °®±¹®»

¿²¼ °®±¼«½» ¬¿¬·¬·½ò ×²º±®³¿¬·±² °®±ª·¼»¼ ±² ¬¸· º±®³ · °¿»¼ ¬± ¬¸» Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ º±® Þ«·²»ô ×²²±ª¿¬·±² ¿²¼

Íµ·´´ ¬± ¿·¬ ®»»¿®½¸ ·²¬± ¬¸» «» ¿²¼ »ºº»½¬·ª»²» ±º »³°´±§³»²¬ ¬®·¾«²¿´ò

ïï Ü»¬¿·´ ±º ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´ Î»°±²¼»²¬

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ

Ò¿³» ±º §±«® »³°´±§»®±® ¬¸» ±®¹¿²·¿¬·±² §±« ¿®»½´¿·³·²¹ ¿¹¿·²¬ò

ß¼¼®»æ Ò«³¾»® ±® Ò¿³»

Í¬®»»¬

Ì±©²ñÝ·¬§

Ý±«²¬§

Ð±¬½±¼»

Ð¸±²» ²«³¾»®æ


Ó® Ö»¿²óÓ¿®½ Ð»²»´±² øÓ¿²¿¹»® ±º ËÕ Ó¿²¿¹»®÷

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

Ó® Ý¸®·¬±°¸» Ì±®®» øÝÛÑ÷

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

Ó Ù¿´´¿²¼ õ þÐ»®±²»´ ¼»°¿®¬³»²¬þáá

Û¨¬± Ú®¿²½»

ì

ïè¬¸ Ó¿®½¸ × ®»½»·ª» ¬¸» ®«¾¾»® ¬¿³°·²¹ ±º ¬¸» ·²·¬·¿´ ¹®·»ª¿²½» ¿²¼ ¿² »ó³¿·´ ®¿··²¹ ²»© ·«»ß »¨°»½¬»¼ ø× ¸¿¼ ¾»»² ¬±´¼ ¬¸· · ©¸¿¬ ©±«´¼ ¸¿°°»² ©»»µ »¿®´·»® ¾§ ¿ Þ®·¬±´ Û³°´±§³»²¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´ Ö«¼¹»÷ ×² ³§·¹²±®¿²½» ±º «½¸ ¬¸·²¹ ¿²¼ ¬¸» ´¿¬ ®»³²¿²¬ ±º ³§ ¼·¹²·¬§ × ¹¿ª» ¬¸» ½±³°¿²§ ¬¸» ¾»²»º·¬ ±º ¼±«¾¬òé¬¸ ß°®·´ × ®»½»·ª» ¿²±¬¸»® ¹®·»ª¿²½» ½±²½´«·±² ´»¬¬»® ¬± ©¸·½¸ × ©¿²¬»¼ ²± °¿®¬ ¾«¬ ¬¸» ½±³°¿²§ ½±²¬·²«»¼ ®»¹¿®¼´»ïê¬¸ ß°®·´ × ¿°°»¿´ ¬¸» ¹®·»ª¿²½» ±º ¬¸» é¬¸ ±º ¿°®·´ ¿ ·²¬®«½¬»¼ ¬± Ó Ù¿´´¿²¼îç¬¸ ß°®·´ × ®»¯«»¬ ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ±² ¬¸» ¿°°»¿´ ¾«¬ ¬¸· · ·¹²±®»¼ ó Ì¸· ¿°°»¿´ ©¿ ²»ª»® ¸»¿®¼ ¼»²§·²¹ ³» ³§ ¾¿·½¸«³¿² ®·¹¸¬ ¬± ¿ º¿·® ¬®·¿´

Ü«®·²¹ ¬¸· ³±²¬¸ ¿½½±®¼·²¹ ¬± þ½±²¬®¿½¬þ × ©¿ »²¬·¬´»¼ ¬± ï ©»»µ ½±³°¿²§ ·½µ °¿§ ¬¸· ©¿ ²»ª»® °¿·¼ò

Ó§ º·²¿´ °¿§ ´·° ·² Ö«²» ©¿ «²½´»¿® ¸±©»ª»® ¾§ ¬¸· ¬¿¹» × ©¿ ²± ´±²¹»® ·² ½±²¬®±´ ±º ³§ ±©² ¿ºº¿·®

×º ¬¸»®» ¿®» ±³··±² ·¬ · ¼«» ¬± ¬¸» ¸¿¬»ô × ¸¿ª» ¸¿¼ ¬± ¿°°´§ ·²¬± ½±³°·´·²¹ ¬¸· ¼±½«³»²¬ò Þ»½¿«» ·¬ »»³ ¿º¬»®¾»·²¹ ¾®¿²¼»¼ ¿ ´·¿®ô ª·½¬·³·»¼ ¿²¼ ¸«³·´·¿¬»¼ ·² ½±«®¬ ô ¬¸» ·²¬»²¬·±² ±º ¬¸» ½±³°¿²§ Ð»²·²«´¿® ¾«·²» »®ª·½» ·¬± ¾®¿²¼ ³» ¿ ¿ þ»®·¿´ ´·¬·¹¿²¬þ ó × ¸¿ª» ²± ©·¸ ¬± ½¿®®§ ¿²±¬¸»® º¿´·º·»¼ ¬¿¹ ©·¬¸ ³» º±® ¬¸» ®»¬ ±º ³§ ´·º»ò

Ð´»¿» ¼± ²±¬ »²¼ ¬¸· ½´¿·³ ¬± Þ®·¬±´ Û³°´±§³»²¬ Ì®·¾«²¿´

ß¼¼®» ±ºæ


Ý±³°´¿·²¬ ±ºÝ±²¬®«½¬·ª» Ü·³·¿´Ø¿®¿³»²¬Ê·½¬·³·¿¬·±²×²º®·²¹»³»²¬ ±º ¸«³¿² ®·¹¸¬

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS

Case Numbers: 1401745/2012, 1401756/2012, 1401811/2012, 1401812/2012 Claimant Mr DI Gardiner

V

Respondent Exsto UK Ltd

& Others Dear Sirs, Further to the claimant’s responses to the Tribunal’s various orders for the provision of additional information on these claims, Regional Employment Judge Parkin directs that:

1) The respondent is not required to present responses to the claims at this stage. 2) A Pre-Hearing Review will be listed at the Bristol Employment Tribunal, The Crescent

Centre, in person to consider whether to strike out part or all of the four claims or whether to order the claimant to pay a deposit as a condition of proceeding with any of the claims. Rules 18 and 20 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2004 will apply to the Pre-Hearing Review which will be listed before an Employment Judge sitting alone.

The notice of pre-hearing review will be sent to the parties in due course. Yours faithfully, MISS C HAMMOND For the Secretary of Employment Tribunals

cc Acas

To: Mr DI Gardiner 5 Weavern Court Chippenham Wiltshire SN14 0LU Mr N Clowrey Peninsula Business Services Ltd 2 Cheetham Hill Road Manchester M4 4FB

First Floor, The Crescent Centre, Temple Back, Bristol, BS1 6EZ

Office: 0117 929 8261 Gold Fax: 0870 739 4009

e-mail: [email protected]

website: www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/employment

Date 31 October 2012


http://www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/employment

BRISTOL ET Cases: 1401745/2012 1401756/20121401811/2012 1401812/2012

4109312/12

Page 1 of 5

BETWEEN: MR DOUGLAS GARDINER CLAIMANT

AND

EXSTO UK LTD & OTHERS RESPONDENTS

1st Request for a review of Judgment on a pre-hearing review

Dear Sir/Madam

I consider the decision of Judge Harper acting alone as draconian, discriminatory,controversial, unreasonable and vexatious.

I also refute the respondent’s acts of “courtesy” as intimidation and an abuse ofprocess.

In my opinion the reference to Henderson is an error. There is a more up to datereasoning in the case Johnson v Gore & Wood where Henderson was explored indetail.

Johnson -v- Gore Wood and Co (a Firm), CA, Cited, (Bailii, [1998] EWCA Civ1763, [1999] BCC 474)Johnson -v- Gore Wood & Co, HL, Explained, (Gazette 05-Jan-01, House ofLords, Times 20-Dec-00, Gazette 22-Feb-01, Bailii, [2000] UKHL 65, [2001] 2WLR 72, [2001] 1 All ER 481, [2002] 2 AC 31)

If that reasoning does not apply does Henderson apply to unrepresentedparties? (In any court)

In Henderson is the point to consider for unrepresented parties whatconstitutes “a court of competent jurisdiction”?

In Henderson, the first case had been represented by both sides withcompetent qualified legal representation? Who by qualification know therules and what evidence to present and are therefore an intricate part of thecourts status as competent? The case was also re-litigation of a success.

BRISTOL ET Cases: 1401745/2012 1401756/20121401811/2012 1401812/2012

4109312/12

Page 2 of 5

How does the Employment Tribunal which hears unrepresented partiesremotely reach the status of Henderson?

In the days before telegraph “Henderson -v- Henderson; 20-Jul-1843”The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases,where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlierproceedings.Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state therule of the Court correctly when I say that, where a given matter becomesthe subject of litigation in, and of adjudication by, a court of competentjurisdiction, the Court requires the parties to that litigation to bringforward their whole case, and will not (except under special circumstances)permit the same parties to open the same subject of litigation in respect ofmatter which might have been brought forward as part of the subject incontest, but which was not brought forward, only because they have, fromnegligence, inadvertence, or even accident, omitted part of their case. Theplea of res judicata applies, except in special cases, not only to pointsupon which the Court was actually required by the parties to form an opinionand pronounce a judgment, but to every point which properly belonged to thesubject of litigation, and which the parties, exercising reasonable diligence,might have brought forward at the time.’Date: 20-Jul-1843Judges: Sir James Wigram VCLinks: Commonlii,References: (1843) 3 Hare 100, [1843] EngR 917, (1843) 67 ER 313

In Henderson the court was a circuit court and a court of record. Employmenttribunals do not reach this status. It has been Judged by a higher court, that theEAT does reach this status.

On this basis the Owen Judgment the panel did not exercise anything remotelyclose to reasonable diligence important facts were missed and in the interests ofjustice need to be retried.

I request a review of the Judgment issued on the 21st of January 2013

BRISTOL ET Cases: 1401745/2012 1401756/20121401811/2012 1401812/2012

4109312/12

Page 3 of 5

Also please review your decision on the basis of this extract.

One of the most controversial powers of the Employment Tribunal is the abilityof single judges at Pre-hearing Reviews to strike out claims, without a fullhearing.

Applications by Respondents to have a claim struck out are becoming morecommon, as (where successful) the application seems to offer them the perfectresult: victory in the case without having to disclose any documents, and withouttheir managers having to face the indignity of being cross-examined, and atrelatively little cost. Claimants, for equivalent reasons, detest being struck out:above all, there seems to be something unjust about having a claim struck outwithout the claimant ever having been fully heard.

The appellate courts are often sceptical about strike out applications: as theyrequire the courts to pre-emptively assess the merits of a claim, without thecourt being in possession of more than a minority of the facts. They alsoencourage satellite litigation: claims can spend years going from appeal toappeal only to be sent back down to a fresh start in the Employment Tribunal,delaying justice, and adding costs all round.

The power to strike out Tribunal claims is contained in rule 18(7) of theEmployment Tribunal Rules of Procedure.

“(7) Subject to paragraph (6), a chairman or tribunal may make a judgment ororder … (b) striking out or amending all or part of any claim or response on the groundsthat it is scandalous, or vexatious or has no reasonable prospect of success…”

As the language of the rule suggests, this power is intended to be reserved forunusual cases. It is not enough to say that a case “might” or even “should” lose.It must have “no reasonable prospect of success”.

While there is a general policy presumption against striking out all cases,irrespective of their jurisdiction, it has long been understood that theexceptional nature of the rule 18(7) power applies with even more force wherethe claim is a discrimination claim.

BRISTOL ET Cases: 1401745/2012 1401756/20121401811/2012 1401812/2012

4109312/12

Page 4 of 5

In the often-cited case of Anyanwu v South Bank University and South BankStudent Union [2001] ICR 391 HL, the House of Lords emphasised:

“24. … the importance of not striking out such claims as an abuse of the processexcept in the most obvious and plainest cases. Discrimination cases are generallyfact-sensitive, and their proper determination is always vital in our pluralisticsociety. In this field perhaps more than any other the bias in favour of a claimbeing examined on the merits or demerits of its particular facts is a matter ofhigh public interest.”

Helpfully the Court of Session (ie the Court of Appeal in Scotland) in Scotland inTayside Public Transport Company Limited (t/a Travel Dundee) v James Reilly[2012] CSIH 46, 30 May 2012, appears to have extended the Anyanwu exceptionto all unfair dismissals in which there is a serious dispute on the facts:

“[30] Counsel are agreed that the power conferred by Rule 18(7)(b) may beexercised only in rare circumstances. It has been described as draconian (Balls vDownham Market High School and College [2011] IRLR 217, at para 4 (EAT)). Inalmost every case the decision in an unfair dismissal claim is fact-sensitive.Therefore where the central facts are in dispute, a claim should be struck outonly in the most exceptional circumstances. Where there is a serious dispute onthe crucial facts, it is not for the Tribunal to conduct an impromptu trial of thefacts (ED & F Mann Liquid Products Ltd v Patel (2003) CP Rep 51, Potter LJ atpara 10). There may be cases where it is instantly demonstrable that the centralfacts in the claim are untrue; for example, where the alleged facts areconclusively disproved by the productions (ED & F Mann Liquid Products Ltd vPatel, supra; Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust, supra). But in the normal casewhere there is a “crucial core of disputed facts,” it is an error of law for theTribunal to pre-empt the determination of a full hearing by striking out (Ezsias vNorth Glamorgan NHS Trust, supra, Maurice Kay LJ, at para 29).”

The facts of Tayside are as follows: a bus driver got lost and drove under abridge, shearing off the top of his bus. Following a short disciplinary process, inwhich it was shown that he had been provided a copy of a route variation buthad not read it, he was summarily dismissed. The ET struck out the cases, only tobe overturned at the EAT, Lady Justice Smith finding that the Judge had gone toofar in striking out the claim. The company appealed to the Court of Session – andlost. While on one view, it might be said that there could be little disagreement

BRISTOL ET Cases: 1401745/2012 1401756/20121401811/2012 1401812/2012

4109312/12

Page 5 of 5

between the parties as to the circumstances of the dismissal (the driverundoubtedly drive the bus into the bridge, it is pretty obvious that causingdamage on this scale is capable of being gross misconduct); applying the abovetest, the Court found that there was a factual dispute, and the Tribunal had notconsidered what additional evidence might come out at a further hearing.Accordingly, the case had to be remitted to the Tribunal for a fresh hearing.

Even a case which, on the surface, is this likely to be determined in favour of thecompany, should not be struck out.

Yours Faithfully

Douglas Gardiner

10 ET4.PHR 10.5


Case Number 1401745/2012, 1401756/2012, 1401811/2012, 1401812/2012, and 4109312/2012 Claimant Mr DI Gardiner

V


& Others

AMENDED NOTICE OF PRE-HEARING REVIEW Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2004

An Employment Judge will conduct a Pre-Hearing Review (‘PHR’) at the First Floor, The Crescent Centre, Temple Back, Bristol, BS1 6EZ commencing on Tuesday, 8 January 2013 at 10:30 am or as soon thereafter on that day as the Tribunal can hear it. [The Tribunal may transfer your case at short notice to be heard at another hearing centre within the region.] It has been given a time allocation of 3 hours. If you think that is not long enough, you must give your reasons, in writing, together with your time estimate by 19 December 2012. The matters to be clarified and, if appropriate, decided at the PHR are:

• Whether to strike out or amend all or any part of the claim on the grounds that it is scandalous or vexatious

• Whether to strike out all or part of the claim because it has no reasonable prospect of success

• Whether to order the claimant to pay a deposit (not exceeding £1000) if it seems that any contentions put forward by the claimant have little reasonable prospect of success

For the avoidance of doubt, the preliminary issues identified in the Notice of Hearing – Pre-Hearing Review (Preliminary Issue) dated 20 November 2012 sent to the parties by the Aberdeen Employment Tribunal will also be decided at this PHR. You may submit written representations for consideration at the hearing. If so, they must be sent to the tribunal and to all other parties not less than 7 days before the hearing. You will have the chance to put forward oral arguments in any case. A copy of the booklet ‘The hearing’ (and expenses leaflet if applicable) can be found on our website at: www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/employment/claims/booklets.

To: Mr DI Gardiner First Floor, The Crescent Centre, Temple Back, Bristol, BS1 6EZ

Office 0117 929 8261 Gold Fax: 0870 7394009

e-mail: [email protected] website: www.justice.gov.uk

Ref:

To: Mr N Clowrey Peninsula Business Services Ltd

Ref:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/employment/claims/booklets


http://www.justice.gov.uk

10 ET4.PHR 10.5

A location map for the office can be found at: www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/employment/venues. If you do not have access to the internet, paper copies can be obtained by telephoning the tribunal office dealing with the claim. To Mr N Clowrey

Peninsula Business Services Ltd 2 Cheetham Hill Road Manchester M4 4FB

And

Mr DI Gardiner 5 Weavern Court Chippenham Wiltshire SN14 0LU

Signed MR S IRELAND For the Secretary of Employment Tribunals Dated 05 December 2012

cc Acas

http://www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/employment/venues


Case Number: 4109312/2012 Claimant Mr DI Gardiner

V


Dear Sir, I refer to your letters dated 3 December, 11 January, and 22 January sent to Aberdeen Employment Tribunal. Since these letters relate to the claim transferred to Bristol Employment Tribunal, Regional Employment Judge Parkin has considered them and directs me to reply as follows:

1) We apologise for the delay in dealing with your correspondence. 2) The decision to transfer the claim from Aberdeen Employment Tribunal to Bristol Employment Tribunal

was made by Vice President of Employment Tribunals (Scotland) Susan Walker with the consent of the President of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales) Judge David Latham, upon Regional Employment Judge Parkin indicating that he had no objection to such a transfer. The decision was made on the basis that it could more conveniently be dealt with in Bristol having regard to the claims presented at Bristol Employment Tribunal based upon the same employment at a location with the Bristol postcode allocated, which claims raised the same preliminary issues for determination.

3) The transfer was effected and the Pre-Hearing Review was held in this claim along with the other

claims on 8 January 2013. The Judgment and Reasons were sent to the parties on 17 January 2013.

4) In the event that the decision to transfer this claim was a decision capable of review within Rule 34 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2004, it not being practicable for it to be considered by Vice President Walker, Regional Employment Judge Parkin refuses the application for a review as there are no grounds for it and there is no reasonable prospect of it being varied or revoked.

Yours faithfully, MISS C HAMMOND For the Secretary of Employment Tribunals

cc Mr N Clowrey Peninsula Business Services Ltd 2 Cheetham Business Services Ltd Manchester M4 4FB

To: Mr DI Gardiner 5 Weavern Court Frogwell Chippenham Wiltshire SN14 0LU BY E-MAIL


Office: 0117 929 8261 Gold Fax: 0870 739 4009



Date 31 January 2013




Case Number: 1401745/2012 & others Claimant Mr DI Gardiner

V


& Others Dear Sir,

Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2004 The file in this case has been referred to Employment Judge Harper. I have been directed to reply, with the following: The claimant’s application for a review of the Judgment of 8 January 2013 is refused pursuant to Rule 35 (3) (c) as the Employment Judge finds that there are no grounds under Rule 34 (3) for the Judgment to be reviewed for the following reasons:

a) The document headed ‘1st Request for a review of Judgment on a pre-hearing review’ is a commentary on and the claimant’s analysis of the Judgment in the case of Henderson v Henderson. The document does not advance any of the grounds set out in Rule 34 (3) (a-e);

b) The email of 1st February 2013 advances none of the grounds in 34 (3) (a-e): c) The email of 4th February 2013 enclosing a letter from the Department for Work

and Pensions with reference to inviting the claimant to medical appointment is not new evidence which has any relevance to the Judgment made on 8 January 2013.

Yours faithfully, MR P FEARS For the Secretary of Employment Tribunals

cc Mr N Clowrey Peninsula Business Services Ltd 2 Cheetham Hill Road

To: Mr DI Gardiner 5 Weavern Court Chippenham Wiltshire SN14 0LU


Office: 0117 929 8261 Gold Fax: 0870 739 4009



Date 05 February 2013



Manchester M4 4FB

Acas

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL Second Floor, Fleetbank House 2-6 Salisbury Square, London, EC4Y 8JX Telephone : 020 7273 1061 Facsimile : 020 7273 1045

www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/tribunals/employment-appeals/

Our Reference: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA

Mr Douglas Iain Gardiner 5 Weavern Court Chippenham Wilts SN14 0LU E-mail & Post 06 June 2013 Dear Sir

Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd I am writing with reference to your Notice of Appeal in the above case from the Decision of an Employment Tribunal sitting at Bristol and promulgated on 21 January 2013. Under Section 21 of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996, this Appeal Tribunal only has jurisdiction to hear appeals from Employment Tribunal Decisions on questions of law, i.e. where it is argued that the Tribunal made some mistake in its interpretation or application of the law in reaching its decision. This means that it is not the function of this Appeal Tribunal to re-hear the facts of a case or to review an Employment Tribunal’s decision on those facts. The appeal has been referred to His Honour Judge Peter Clark in accordance with Rule 3(7) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 (as amended) and in his opinion your Notice of Appeal discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the appeal. He states:

It is a cardinal rule of law that claims between the same parties, once finally determined, cannot be relitigated. The principle of finality of litigation applies. The present claims are based on the Appellant’s employment with the Respondent which ended with his resignation effective on 28 May 2011. He then brought various claims in the Bristol ET which were dismissed by an ET chaired by Employment Judge Owen in September 2011. Now he wishes to revive those claims in these proceedings, adding further claims which could and should have been raised in the original proceedings. That is not permissible. Employment Judge Harper was right to strike them out. For the above reasons the learned Judge considers that this Appeal has no reasonable prospect of success and that, in accordance with Rule 3(7), no further action will be taken on it.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/guidance/courts-and-tribunals/tribunals/employment-appeals/



Your attention is drawn to Rules 3(8) and 3(10) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules. A copy of Rule 3 is enclosed with this letter. Yours faithfully Ms J Johnson Deputy Registrar CC: Peninsula Business Services Ltd for the Respondent (Ref: Mr Neil Clowrey) Bristol Employment Tribunal (ref: 1401745/12,1401756/12 & 1401811/12)


[email protected]

From: <[email protected]>Date: 29 July 2013 12:11To: <[email protected]>Attach: N1 Gardiner v Exsto uk & ors.pdfSubject: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA

Page 1 of 2

12/12/2013

Ms J JohnsonDeputy RegistrarThe Employment Appeal Tribunal 2ndFloor,Fleetbank House2-6SailsburySquare,London EC4Y 8JX29/07/2013

Gardiner v Exsto UK Ltd & Others.Dear Ms Johnson

Thank you for your letter dated 23rd July 2013.

Stating

“The Appellant was notified of His Honour Judge Peter Clark’s Decision on 6 June 2013. Time for challenging that decision has now expired – see Rules 3(8) and 3(10).

No further action will be taken on the appeal in the absence of any challenge under Rules 3(8) or 3(10). If the Appellant intends to now apply under Rule 3(8) and 3(10) he will need to make an application for an extension of time to the Registrar. Any application for an extension of time must be accompanied by either a fresh Notice of Appeal or an application for an oral hearing under Rule 3(10).”

As an unrepresented party I have found the EAT is wasted my time, I am dissatisfied with the decision to reject my correspondence at this stage, I order an oral hearing.

I refuse to attend the oral hearing and request representation at the oral hearing under the ELAAS scheme from a volunteer or Peninsular Business Services.

The legal representatives should be allowed at least 10 days to present the arguments as presented in the following cases.

1400500/2011, 1401745/2012, 1401756/2012 , 1401811/2012, 1401812/2012, 4109312/2012

UKEATPA/1798/11/JOJ, UKEATPA/0386/13/LA


mailto:<[email protected]>


A2 2012/2751, A2 2012/2752

Also I am dissatisfied with the decision to reject my appeals at this stage with the following reasons.

It is a cardinal rule of law that claims between the same parties, once finally determined, cannot be relitigated. The principle of finality of litigation applies.The present claims are based on the Appellant’s employment with the Respondent which ended with his resignation effective on 28 May 2011. He then brought various claims in the Bristol ET which were dismissed by an ET chaired by Employment Judge Owen in September 2011. Now he wishes to revive those claims in these proceedings, adding further claims which could and should have been raised in the original proceedings. That is not permissible. Employment Judge Harper was right to strike them out.

I attach N1 outlining further arguments and an EX160 for an application for fee remission

Ç╙śŉś ╜ℓ ■◘ Ċ╜▓ś ĽĂŉ

1. The limits for personal and criminal injury claims are 3 & 2 years respectively.

2. The date of the industrial accident was the 09/12/10 = 2 years 7 months

3. The date of the hearing where perjury was committed inflicting more injury was the 07-09/09/11 = 1 year 10 months

t▄śĂℓś ľ◘ĵ ▄ŕ Ŧ◘ĵ ŉś♫▄Ŧ ĽŦ śỚ▓Ă╜▄ ◘■▄ŦỀ

Yours faithfully

Douglas Iain Gardiner.

Page 2 of 2

12/12/2013

[email protected]

From: <[email protected]>Date: 29 July 2013 15:56To: <[email protected]>Attach: 1401745.12 19.6.13.doc; Request for case review - wasted costs (2).pdfSubject: Fw: Request for order 1400500/2011 & Others UKEATPA/1798/11/JOJ, UKEATPA/0386/13/LA, A2

2012/2751 & A2 2012/2752 Mr D Gardiner v Exsto UK Ltd

Page 1 of 2

12/12/2013

Dear Sir/Madam

Could you please advise on the status of the attached request for order dated 20/06/2013

Yours Faithfully

Douglas Gardiner

From: [email protected]: Thursday, June 20, 2013 9:02 AMTo: [email protected]: Request for order 1400500/2011 & Others UKEATPA/1798/11/JOJ, UKEATPA/0386/13/LA, A2 2012/2751 & A2 2012/2752 Mr D Gardiner v Exsto UK Ltd

Request For Order1) The appellant Mr Douglas Iain Gardiner2) Any communication relating to this request may be sent to the appellant ate-mail: [email protected]: 079731724053) The appellant requests an order from the Bristol Employment TribunalCase No 1401745/2012 & othersHeard 8th January 2013Before Judge HarperJudgment date 21rd January 20134) The parties to the proceedings before the employment tribunal, other than the appellant, were1st Respondent EXSTO UK LTD 67 Roundponds, Melksham, Wiltshire2nd Respondent Mr. J BAXEVANIDIS3rd Respondent Mr J M PENELON5) Copies of—(a) Letter dated 19/06/2013(b) Letter dated 06/06/2013are attached to this request.7) The grounds of request for the order.

The employment tribunal states

“There is no power to Order the Respondent to provide reasons for







withdrawing the application for a preparation time order.”

Does the power exist within the courts to allow such an order?

The claimant requires the full reasons for the withdrawal to establish closure and finality.The claimant considered the application for costs as intimidation and as a lever to force withdrawal of other claims.

Page 2 of 2

12/12/2013

[email protected]

From: "LONDONEAT" <[email protected]>Date: 02 August 2013 14:40To: <[email protected]>Subject: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA - Mr D Gardiner v Exsto UK Ltd

Page 1 of 2

12/12/2013

Dear Mr Gardiner

The EAT has received your emails dated 23 and 29 July and 01 and 02 August 2013.

Your email dated 23 July 2013 asks for clarification of the EAT’s letter of 23 July 2013. Your email of 04 July 2013 asked for an extension of time to take action under EAT Rules 3(8) or 3(10). The EAT’s letter advised that such an application must be accompanied by either a fresh notice of appeal or an application for an oral hearing. To clarify, the EAT refused to consider an application for an extension of time until you had taken one of those two actions.

Your first email dated 29 July 2013 and timed 11:12 is in reply to the EAT’s letter dated 23 July 2013 and appears to be an application for a hearing under EAT Rule 3(10), however the documents attached to that email do not seem to be relevant to such an application.

As indicated in the EAT’s letter dated 23 July 2013, such an application is out of time, and an application for an extension of time is required. If you wish your email of 04 July 2013 to serve as your application for an extension of time, please advise the EAT, otherwise please lodge your application for an extension of time by 16:00 (4pm) on Friday 09 August 2013.

Please note that the EAT will not request ELAAS to provide an advisor for you if you do not intent to attend the hearing.

Regarding your email dated 29 July 2013 and timed 14:56, it was assumed that your email of 20 June 2013 was copied to the EAT for information only and that you wanted the Bristol Employment Tribunal to take action, because you say in that email: “the appellant requests an order from the Bristol Employment Tribunal”.

Please explain what action you want the EAT to take in response to your email of 20 June 2013. Was it was your intention to appeal against the Employment Tribunal’s direction dated 19 June 2013?

Regarding your email dated 01 August 2013, your change of postal address has been noted, and we will continue to correspond with you by email where possible.

Regarding your email dated 02 August 2013, I have dealt with your emails dated 29 July 2013 above.

Mark HarringtonOperational Support ManagerEmployment Appeal Tribunal

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 02 August 2013 10:31To: BRISTOLET; LONDONEAT






Dear Sir/Madam I thank you for your letter below – please see my answers in bold. Yours Faithfully Douglas Gardiner From: LONDONEAT Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 2:40 PM To: mailto:[email protected] Subject: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA - Mr D Gardiner v Exsto UK Ltd Dear Mr Gardiner The EAT has received your emails dated 23 and 29 July and 01 and 02 August 2013. Your email dated 23 July 2013 asks for clarification of the EAT’s letter of 23 July 2013. Your email of 04 July 2013 asked for an extension of time to take action under EAT Rules 3(8) or 3(10). The EAT’s letter advised that such an application must be accompanied by either a fresh notice of appeal or an application for an oral hearing. To clarify, the EAT refused to consider an application for an extension of time until you had taken one of those two actions. The EAT took 19 days to respond to my request for an extension of time by which time they refused to consider it. Very confusing. My request for an extension of time was in a similar format to one presented by the respondents representatives their extension for time was granted without question, despite my objections. Your first email dated 29 July 2013 and timed 11:12 is in reply to the EAT’s letter dated 23 July 2013 and appears to be an application for a hearing under EAT Rule 3(10), however the documents attached to that email do not seem to be relevant to such an application. You are correct this mail is an application for a hearing. The documents attached consider arguments which were put to Judge Harper but not considered. As indicated in the EAT’s letter dated 23 July 2013, such an application is out of time, and an application for an extension of time is required. If you wish your email of 04 July 2013 to serve as your application for an extension of time, please advise the EAT, otherwise please lodge your application for an extension of time by 16:00 (4pm) on Friday 09 August 2013.


Please accept this reply and the email of 4th July as applications for extensions for time – however I feel the EAT is at fault and has wasted my time by not replying to my correspondence sooner. Please note that the EAT will not request ELAAS to provide an advisor for you if you do not intent to attend the hearing. It would be my intention to attend the hearing via telephone or conferencing facilities – As I have done so before in May 2012 with an ELAAS representative. Regarding your email dated 29 July 2013 and timed 14:56, it was assumed that your email of 20 June 2013 was copied to the EAT for information only and that you wanted the Bristol Employment Tribunal to take action, because you say in that email: “the appellant requests an order from the Bristol Employment Tribunal”. The order is requested from the Bristol ET, but Bristol has stated in the letter dated 19th of June, they do not have the power to raise such an order.

The request was for the EAT to empower Bristol to raise the order ie “the appellant requests an order from the Bristol Employment Tribunal” or for the EAT to raise the order on behalf of Bristol.

Please explain what action you want the EAT to take in response to your email of 20 June 2013. Was it was your intention to appeal against the Employment Tribunal’s direction dated 19 June 2013? It was not my intention to appeal the decision but to assist the court by obtaining this order/power on their behalf. However if this statement can be defined as such then it is an appeal. Regarding your email dated 01 August 2013, your change of postal address has been noted, and we will continue to correspond with you by email where possible. Thank you Regarding your email dated 02 August 2013, I have dealt with your emails dated 29 July 2013 above. Thank you Mark Harrington Operational Support Manager Employment Appeal Tribunal

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL

Appeal No UKEATPA/0386/13/LA

B E F O R E MS P DONLEAVY

REGISTRAR IN CHAMBERS

IN THE MATTER of an Appeal under Section 21(1) of the Employment Tribunals Act 1996 from the Judgment of an Employment Tribunal sitting at Bristol and sent to the parties on the 21st day of January 2013

B E T W E E N : Mr D I Gardiner Appellant

- and -

EXSTO UK Ltd Respondent

UPON THE application of the Appellant by e-mail dated the 4 th day of July 2013 for an extension of time in which to express dissatisfaction and request an oral hearing pursuant to Rule 3(10) of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules (1993) as amended AND UPON consideration of the aforesaid application

IT IS ORDERED that the application for an extension of time be granted for the reasons attached

D A T E D the 19th day of August 2013 TO: Mr Douglas Iain Gardiner the Appellant Peninsula Business Services Ltd for the Respondent The Secretary, Central Office of Employment Tribunals, England & Wales

(Case No.1401745/12,1401756/12 & 1401811/12)



Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd Rule 3(7) of the Rules of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Rules 1993 as amended provides that no further action shall be taken upon any Notice of Appeal where is appears to a Judge that the Notice of Appeal discloses no reasonable grounds. The appellant was notified by a letter dated 6 th June 2013 that the appeal received was rejected. By Rul 3(8), extant until the 28 th July 2013 the appellant may served a fresh Notice of Appeal within 28 days from the date on which the notification was sent to hi. However the appellant has failed to serve such as fresh Notice within the time limit. By Rule 3(10) the appellant may express dissatisfaction with a Rule 3(7) notice within 28 days and if he does so, is entitled to have the matter heard before a judge who shall make a direction as to whether any further action shall be taken on the appeal. However the appellant failed to express dissatisfaction within the time limit. The appellant was sent a copy of the EAT Practice Direction on 23 rd January 2013. Furthermore the Rule 3(7) notice is always accompanied by a separate page giving an extract of Rule 3(8) and Rule 3(10) including the time limits. By Rule 20(2) and the Practice Direction 2008, paragraph 3.6, any application for an extension of time in which to file an appeal shall be treated as an interim application and dealt with by the Registrar. The Registrar determined how such an application shall be dealt with, taking into account proportionality and saving expense and determines that she shall consider the appellants application for an extension of time for a Rule 3910) hearing without reference to the respondent. It is the appellants duty to be aware of the importance of time limits and that these will be relaxed only in rare and exceptional cases where the EAT is satisfied that there is a full, honest and acceptable explanation of the reasons for the delay ( AZIZ v BETHNAL GREEN CITY CHALLENGE COMPANY LTD) (2000) IRLR 111 The appellant’s correspondence with this court has been tendentious and at time unreasonable. He is not entitled to receive advice from the court in respect of any appeal. However it is the practice of this court to have a fairly liberal attitude to applications for a Rule 3(10) hearing. I consider it is clear that on the 4 th July, when the appellant emailed, he intended to challenge the Rule 3(7) decision. On this occasion I am prepared to give the appellant the benefit of the doubt and accept the email as his challenge but he should be aware that such leniency is exceptional.


[email protected]

From: <[email protected]>Date: 28 October 2013 12:52To: <[email protected]>Cc: "Neil Clowrey" <[email protected]>Attach: scan0001.pdf; 1400500 capability v conduct.pdf; Wasted Costs Hearing Submission part 1.pdfSubject: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd

Page 1 of 1

12/12/2013

Dear Sir/Madam

I write to the EAT to request a postponement of the rule 3(10) hearing listed 18th Dec 2013 on the following grounds.

1. The claimant’s case has already been heard in Bristol in September 2011 with judgment issued under 1400500/2011 the judgment is clearly wrong as per the attached copy.

2. The claimant submitted a number of review applications to Bristol under 1400500/2011, all of which have been rejected. The claimant’s appeal to the EAT was dismissed following a rule 3(10) hearing, challenged on review (which was refused)

3. All of the appeals are clear attempts to have the case reheard due to the misconducting of proceedings by the respondents.

4. The Bristol cases are to be listed for a wasted costs hearing against the respondents representatives.

5. The rule 3(10) hearing is delaying proceedings at Bristol (see attached letter) 5. The issues in EAT are the same as the issues in Bristol. 6. To conserve judicial resources at the employment appeal tribunal, and to save

time and costs for all parties.7. The claimant applies to consolidate all claims and have them listed with the

hearing for costs at Bristol and to be heard together.8. This would ensure all claims are considered together in a consistent manner.

Yours Faithfully

Douglas Gardiner





[email protected]

From: <[email protected]>Date: 21 November 2013 15:12To: <[email protected]>Cc: "Neil Clowrey" <[email protected]>Attach: PA 0386 13 LA NoH (18 Dec 13)-signed.pdfSubject: Fw: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA Letter EAT to Appellant 12/11/13 Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd

Page 1 of 3

12/12/2013

Dear Sir/Madam

I note it is 9 days since I sent the e-mail below without answer? Please could you reply as soon is convenient.

I also consider the costs both financial and the damage that would be inflicted upon my wellbeing by attending a hearing in London for 1 hour on the 18th of December make no sense at all.

I now live in France to travel and to and too stay in London would cost in the region of £350 and make me unwell, whereas a phone call would cost £0.

I also feel that all of the documentation I have already submitted, more than provide ample support for my arguments.

I therefore propose. At a time which is convenient and if required a Judge or Registrar can call me on

+44 (0)7 97 31 72 405+33 (0)2 53 68 50 29

with any questions he has in relation to cases as listed.

IN THEBRISTOL ET 1400500/2011, 1401745/2012, 1401756/2012, 1401811/2012, 1401812/2012, 4109312/2012EAT UKEATPA/1798/11/JOJ, UKEATPA/0386/13/LACOURT OF APPEAL A2 2012/2751 A2 2012/2752

Alternatively and preferably questions can be answered by e-mail.

Yours Faithfully

Douglas Gardiner





From: [email protected]: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 5:47 PMTo: LONDONEATCc: Neil ClowreySubject: Re: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA Letter EAT to Appellant 12/11/13 Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd

Dear Sir/Madam

I very much thank you for your letter dated 28th Oct 2013.

I find it very surprising indeed that you have failed to honour my request!

The reason: - When the respondents representatives made an almost identical request to the Aberdeen Employment Tribunal (Their request was the basis for my request)

And despite my objections their request was honoured. My request on the same basis has without objection has been refused.

Could you please explain your reasons further, as the given response of the deputy registrar is clearly unfair and inconsistent with the decision of the Aberdeen and Bristol Employment Tribunals.

Yours Faithfully

Douglas GArdiner

From: LONDONEATSent: Tuesday, November 12, 2013 4:59 PMTo: mailto:[email protected]: mailto:[email protected]: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA Letter EAT to Appellant 12/11/13 Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd

Dear Sir,

Please see the attached.

Yours faithfully,

Lethika Anilkumarfor Registrar

Employment Appeal Tribunal

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention ofthe addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copyingis not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy allcopies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message

Page 2 of 3

12/12/2013





Our Reference: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA

Mr Douglas Iain Gardiner c/o Ms P Gardiner 28 Marshall Street Chippenham Wiltshire SN14 0ED BY EMAIL ONLY

25-11-13 Dear Sir

Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd I refer to the above matter and your email dated 12 th November 2013 seeking further reasons for the Deputy Registrar’s decision to refuse your adjournment application. The Deputy Registrar has directed me to reply to you as follows: “The Appellant is appealing the strike out decision of the Employment Tribunal. A review of that decision was refused. I see no reason to adjourn the hearing at the EAT on the 18 th December 2013. The Appellant complains of delays in his email of 28/10/2013 – to postpone this R3(10) hearing would simply further delay matters” The hearing listed on the 18 th December 2013 remains in the list. Your attention is drawn to para 8 of the EAT Practice Direction 2013 and the requirement to lodge hearing bundles. Please lodge 3 copies of a bundle by no later than 4pm on Tuesday 3 rd December 2013. Yours faithfully Lethika Anilkumar For the Registrar cc Peninsula Business Services Ltd (Legal Services De for the Respondent


[email protected]

From: <[email protected]>Date: 10 December 2013 15:12To: <[email protected]>Cc: "Neil Clowrey" <[email protected]>Attach: Minutes of Meetin.pdf; 1400500 capability v conduct.pdfSubject: UKEATPA/0386/13/LA Mr D I Gardiner v EXSTO UK Ltd

Page 1 of 1

12/12/2013

Dear Sir/Madam

With the submission of the attached documents I do not feel I have to add any more documents to the appeal.

What I say is the truth my honesty does not allow me change my story to suit as the respondents and their representatives have.

As can be seen from this document I have not changed my story, nor will I... these are the facts that were accepted by the DWP in respect of my depression resulting from the industrial accident at Exsto Uk. This document among others was presented at the tribunal 1400500/2011 but for reasons totally beyond my comprehension was not accepted as a true version of events. As I have said before Mr Baxevanidis & Mr Torres both perverted the course of justice in relation to a speeding offence in 2007 and they continue to do so in relation to my claims.

I sincerely hope that the Judiciary can accept that they have made a mistake in supporting the claims of Exsto and Peninsular Business Services. I remain optimistic that the EAT will overturn the judgment of Sept 2011.

The remedy lies with the EAT.

In the event that my appeal is dismissed please could you advise who to appeal to? The Court of Appeal as I have found before has limited resources' and as I was unrepresented was unable to give my previous appeal the time of day!

Yours Faithfully

Douglas Gardiner





eat core bundle rule 3(10) hearing

Law