Chapman v Simon is alive and kicking after 20 years, says Ryan Clement
As advocates in court, as well as in the employment tribunal, it is important to remain focused on what is being alleged by the claimant(s), what has been agreed as being the issues in the case (preferably from the outset of the hearing) and what evidence is needed in law to prove a case. In the heat of an adversarial exchange there is the temptation either to seek to prove or to disprove everything that is raised in witness statements/oral evidence irrespective of their relevance to the issues on which the tribunal has to decide. And, unfortunately, it is just not the advocates. We have seen cases where tribunals themselves have wrongly and/or mistakenly awarded claimants remedies in cases based on findings that were not in fact relevant to the complaint brought or pleaded.
Chapman v Simon
The Court of Appeal authority of Chapman and another (appellants) v Simon (respondent) [1994] IRLR 124 is still alive and kicking after 20 years. In fact, in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) practice in relation
