This website uses cookies to help us give you the best experience when you visit our website. By continuing to use this website, you consent to our use of these cookies.
Iteshi v British Telecommunications - The "fraudulent judges" of the EAT: HHJ McMullen chooses to "differ" [2011] EAT
Iteshi v British Telecommunications - The "fraudulent judges" of the EAT: HHJ McMullen chooses to "differ" [2011] EAT
There is no logic to the argument that, since the Claimant takes no drink or drugs and is not a madman, any judge who finds against him must be wrong or biased.
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.