Boulding v Land Securities Trillium Ltd - "No case to answer" [2006] EAT

Tribunals have generally been discouraged from dismissing cases on the basis of "no case to answer", save in extreme cases. A main reason is that if a case brought by an employee is dismissed on that basis of "no case to answer" at conclusion of the employee setting out his case, he will not have had any opportunity to cross-examine the employer.

This whistleblowing case is an example of a tribunal wrongly acceding to a half-time submission of no case made.

On appeal the EAT remitted the case back for rehearing.

The full content of this page is available to subscribers only. Please purchase a subscription if you feel this content will be of use to you.

Login or subscribe (includes subscription information) to access the full content of this page.