Appeal No.	 EAT/345/97

EMPLOYMENT APPEAL TRIBUNAL
58 VICTORIA EMBANKMENT, LONDON EC4Y 0DS

	At the Tribunal
	On 27 June 1997

Before
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE MORISON (PRESIDENT)
MR A C BLYGHTON
MR P A L PARKER CBE

(1) MISS T PENNOCK (2) MISS J HEWITT	APPELLANTS

M & M KNITWEAR (1982) LTD	RESPONDENTS

Transcript of Proceedings

JUDGMENT

PRELIMINARY HEARING - EX PARTE

Revised

	APPEARANCES

For the Appellants	MR W STRUTHERS
(Solicitor)
Citizens Advice Bureau
Bath Lane
Stockton
TS18 2EQ	

	MR JUSTICE MORISON (PRESIDENT):   The purpose of this hearing was to determine whether there was an arguable point of law raised in the appeals which have been presented on behalf of two former employees of M & M Knitwear (1982) Ltd. Both of them complained of sexual harassment. Both of them were given awards of compensation which, it is said, are too low, having regard to other decisions.

	Whilst in the normal course of events the Employment Appeal Tribunal would regard the assessment of compensation for injury to feelings and aggravated damages awards as matters falling essentially within the Industrial Tribunal’s discretion, it does seem to us that there are grounds for thinking that Industrial Tribunals would be greatly assisted if this Court were to give some general guidance on the approach to compensation in cases such as these. 

	We consider that it is arguable that the awards that were made in the cases were too small. But it is principally because we think that this case raises a more general question that we are giving leave. It would be of considerable assistance to the Court if the Equal Opportunities Commission were made aware of these proceedings and invited to take them over and instruct Counsel. 

	It goes without saying that we shall require from the appellants, however they are represented, a skeleton argument which will rehearse the factors which it is contended an Industrial Tribunal should take into account when assessing awards such as these, and with some indication of the levels awards in other cases, so that the Employment Appeal Tribunal can then consider whether guidance is required and if so what guidance to give.