Teacher appeal over tribunal case

Mr Kerr had made allegations about exam marking

A maths teacher who was not awarded compensation after winning a case for unfair dismissal has taken his claim to Scotland's highest court.

Ian Kerr, 63, labelled the employment tribunal he faced in 2005 a "shambles" as he appealed against its decision.

The former teacher at Aberdeen's Hazlehead Academy was speaking at the Court of Session in Edinburgh.

He resigned from his post after complaining about alleged leniency in the marking of pupils' exam papers.

Mr Kerr took Aberdeen City Council to an employment tribunal more than two years ago, claiming unfair dismissal.

He won his case but was not awarded any compensation or "remedy".

I was never allowed to test the credibility in totality. That's the major area of my argument Ian Kerr

Mr Kerr, who now lives in Dundee, told police that former colleagues who gave evidence at the hearing committed perjury.

It emerged on Monday that officers from Tayside Police had questioned teachers from the school and education officials about Mr Kerr's claims.

Police said afterwards they found no evidence of any crime being committed and that no further action would be taken.

The tribunal judgment stated Mr Kerr had not behaved professionally and had used insulting language towards a council official investigating his complaint.

But he claims the evidence about his alleged conduct was false and that correct procedures were not followed at the hearing.

Representing himself in court, the teacher argued before Lords Osborne, Kingarth and Wheatley that the tribunal was a "procedural shambles".

He claimed that documentary evidence suggesting that witnesses for the other side had lied was never properly examined.

'Personal attack'

He told the judges: "On the seventh day of the hearing, I had presented new evidence which I believe represented the fact that proved that two witnesses of the respondent's had blatantly lied under oath."

Those witnesses, he said, were never called back to give evidence to the tribunal.

Mr Kerr added: "While remedy is the area that essentially I'm appealing against, what I would want to focus on is the fact that the credibility of the witnesses who were used in support of remedy was never tested.

"I was never allowed to test the credibility in totality. That's the major area of my argument."

He claimed, on the balance of probabilities, that the judgment had been decided upon before written submissions were handed in.

"My impression was the tribunal was latterly going through the motions," he said.

He has also raised concerns about the evidence given to the tribunal about his abilities as a maths teacher.

Mr Kerr said the "poorly presented" judgment contained an "unsolicited personal attack on myself, with not a shred of evidence".

The hearing, which has been set down for two days, continues.