Hi all

In short, would a respondent risk committing perjury at a tribunal hearing when if they told the truth they would jeopardise their case in such a way that they would lose.

Basically I want to ask questions at my hearing, which if the managers answer correctly would prove my unfair dismissal case, if they lie they commit perjury which I can prove.

Hope this makes sence ........

From what I have experienced and seen on this forum, many lies are told at the ET but it is only considered perjury in the most extreme circumstances.

Employers defend against the facts of the case by bare denials and utter falsehoods but there is a good deal of tolerance for this as they are seen as protecting their company's interests even though they are not telling the truth.

Action was taken against an employer who bodged up a contract and payslips and he ended up doing about 6 months in gaol but it really has to be that clear cut to attract any sanction or penalty from an ET judge.

Other CAGGERS may be able to explain it better, but in my view, the ET is not a proper court and does not offer the protection of a proper court against false evidence and perjury. It is formal and costly and there is a judge but it is really just a Tribunal.

Browncow, thanks for your post. I assumed that swearing on oath and making statements of fact and truth would be taken very seriously. That said I was referring more to perjury being made public after the tribunal. I understand the ET are packed with media representatives, what is the best way to approach these to get them interested in your case?

Thanks

I think that kind of publicity is pretty rare, unless of course there is a bit of a story in it. The hearings are public so anyone can attend. If you really want press coverage, I think the best way is to approach your local rag, for example Newsshopper, and suggest it.

Depending on the content, your story might be picked up by a national paper and even if it isn't , local rags have a substantial circulation as they are often free or at least cheap.

From what I have read elsewhere it isn't a good idea to get media involved.

Never say die Professional the odds are 50/50 and it all depends on legal points and definitions (ave you heard of the Johnson area, for example?). Also a PHR can work in your favour as one side will probably have to concede an area of dispute and if your case is strong enough it could lead to an offer of settlement before full hearing.

Thank you for your words of encouragement Browncow. Just out of interest why are you called Browncow?

How now? I had the picture from a Christmas Nativity I made with the kids.

Oh I just wondered. Take it you are a woman same as me then if you were making things with the kids LOL When are you expecting the decision on your case? When I went to watch an ET they gave the judgement there and then at the end - is that unusual? I only went to watch one (3 days)

I think it depends on the complexity of the legal aspects of the case. The last day of my case was left for the judges to deliberate and they flagged that they would probably need a further day. This means that they will have to find another day to get together and as there are 3 of them, my lawyer said that he felt it would take about 4 weeks.

I am not finding it so bad because the thing to face is that all the court stuff is superficial and has little bearing on real life. Win or lose the problems remain the same and adjustments have to be made.

ET decisions remain more of a secret than I realised. Although they are a matter of record, there is a charge of £10 for the written judgement so it must be easy for employers to "spin" even if they lose.

:\ That's quite a long time to wait and in the meantime you having to see them at work. I don't suppose they talk to you about it at work. It must be extremely difficult for you. I signed on with an temp agency and had problems getting them to give the agency a reference, which I think left a bad taste as I have just seen an ideal job for me on totaljobs and it is advertised by the agency I signed on with. I called them and asked them why I hadn't been told about the post or put forward for it as I have the relevant investment banking experience (10 years) albeit about 15 years ago. She said they wanted someone with more recent investment banking experience, but it is only a temp role! I may be getting paranoid but I feel as if my ex employers are thwarting my attempts at getting a job so I think you were wise to keep your job as it is hellish trying to get employment after an ET claim!

They really do not bother me at all now Professional. It is over and I made my very expensive point.

I never intend to get another job after this one and I want to quit for good around Christmas or before, if it gets nasty again.

No more workin' for de man or de wooman for that matter

Dear Browncow,

glad that your hearing is over, how do you feel it went? I'm glad you seem so positive about it. I am deliberating on my appeal, as I have my written decision and it did not go in my favour at all. Very disappointed. Please are you able to offer any advice with regards to appeal?

Also can you elaborate on the Johnson exclusion and what PHR stands for? I have looked Johnson up on google, but dont really understand the concept.

All the best

BB

I have no experience of ET appeals Billybob. There are some lawyers on the forum who might help with that.

A PHR is a Pre Hearing Review and it is a sort of mini-hearing before the main hearing, Its purpose is to sort out major areas of contention in the case. For example, if the employer disputes disability, there could be a PHR to sort that issue out and, if the Claimant loses that argument, there could be no point in progressing to a full hearing.

The PHR is not used all that often as it is not considered the most efficient use of Tribunal time. Major disputes can be argued at the main hearing so a PHR is often not necessary.

The Johnson area relates to unfair and constructive dismissal. It refers to an actual case and it refers to loss of income before and after dismissal. I do not really understand it so my explanation may not be correct but here goes.

If, for example, a worker had run out of sick pay and was dismissed and claimed unfair dismissal they could claim loss of earnings up to the day they got the boot as well as future loss of earnings as a result of getting the boot.

However, if the same worker was not sacked but because they had run out of sick leave, resigned and claimed constructive dismissal they can only claim for loss of future earnings and cannot claim for loss of income prior to their resignation.

Hi, Yes have no doubt they will commit perjury and they will have to to keep to their story. Don't assume everyone has your standards, that will be an error on your part. You have to find enough flaws in their arguments, ideally in written fact. Anything subjective can go either way. Pick holes in their ET3 and any statement. Also look for things that they should have done and where they have not, e.g. correct processes.

Hello everyone can anybody clarify if there is anything I can do ,my former manager lied under oath in the employment tribunal ,not once but twice .

She did this despite me having evidence and witnesses to back this up , the tribunal hearing ruled in the companys (name edited) favour because the lies she told we're what I had notified head office about in confidence and they had shared the information with the management involved .

The lie she told was she denied verbally threatening myself and two others with dismissal for raising the issue of another manager bullying members of staff .

She also denied that the company discussed an out of court settlement despite me having the email evidence .

Can anyone advise me in what if anything I can do about this ???

I can't afford to go back to the solicitor it's already cost me nearly £5k but need this injustice to be resolved .

Hello and welcome to CAG.

I've removed the company's name and location from your post, we don't need them in order to advise and you will remain anonymous.

My best, HB

Hi I think if you appeal it is free? I think the system is so unfair.

I went to view a Tribunal once and it was obvious that the employer was lying, and they tied themselves in knots, but still they believed them and not the employee!

I think it is really difficult to win a tribunal.

I pulled out of mine at the pre-hearing review when it was obvious I wasnt going to get a fair crack of the whip as already my previous employer had been telling lies and they believed it.

I think maybe you shouldn't waste any more of your precious life on them.

They know they have lied.

Alternatively you can appeal and see what happens.

i wish you all the best.

I hate to think of people lying and getting away with it, but it seems that the odds are stacked against honest people in the tribunal system.

Remember that ET is not about who is "lying" and who is telling the "truth". These things can be extremely subjective, especially in an emotionally stressed situation.

It is about whether the employee has a legal claim against the employer. Nothing more nothing less.

If those lies were corrected, would it have made any difference to the overall outcome?

Hello everyone can anybody clarify if there is anything I can do ,my former manager lied under oath in the employment tribunal ,not once but twice . She did this despite me having evidence and witnesses to back this up , the tribunal hearing ruled in the companys (name edited) favour because the lies she told we're what I had notified head office about in confidence and they had shared the information with the management involved . The lie she told was she denied verbally threatening myself and two others with dismissal for raising the issue of another manager bullying members of staff . She also denied that the company discussed an out of court settlement despite me having the email evidence . Can anyone advise me in what if anything I can do about this ??? I can't afford to go back to the solicitor it's already cost me nearly £5k but need this injustice to be resolved .

From my research it depends on whether the lies told would indicate a contravention of article 6 rights to justice. I have been researching a lot on this as I am assisting a friend with taking a case to higher courts as the lies in that case are referred to in judgement as factual findings which amounts to perjury and perverting the courts of justice and brings the justice system into disrepute which has additionally led to a miscarriage of justice and is error of the ET for substituting its own version for that of the respondents as the findings are not supported by factual evidence and misapplying law etc

I suggest that you carry out some research on your own case, identify the relevant law and procedures that the ET had to apply by reading the legislation to be applied and tribunal rules and procedures in full as well as practise directions. Additionally read the criteria of the lead cases which have to be followed such as burchell if its unfair dismissal and research and read cases with similar to find case law. You can find the transcript of cases on the tribunal services site, Bailii, Biall or by various other sites. Make sure to research well check that the case is the most valid and has not been overuled by a later case.

Then go through the judgement and reasons and see if you can identify either legal errors, perversity or apearance of or actual bias.

Hope this might help. It is a hard job and I wish you good luck and hope that you can find somthing that might aid you to obtain justice.

How did your friend get on in the Higher Courts, on what grounds did they challenge the perjury please?

How did your friend get on in the Higher Courts, on what grounds did they challenge the perjury please?

The post is nearly 5 years old and the poster hasn't been back CAG since 2014 so I doubt you will get an answer.

Hi

Despite identifying the relevant laws which prove that laws, procedures and bias has taken place in this case and the judgement contravenes Article 6 rights to justice and the judgement is illegal, the courts refuse so far to look at the evidence in this case and Justice has been denied showing just how corrupt our legal system is.

However I am determined to continue and will not stop till Justice is both done and seen to be done.

At the present I cannot say too much as I am looking for a legal professional that would be both able and willing to take on this case as the denial of justice has further escalated this case to the rule of law being ignored by our justice system leading to a further contravention of human rights.

This is not easy an easy task as we do not have the finances to pay for the services of a qualified and capable professional in this field, we therefore need to obtain volunteers that are willing to help us work on this together for free that have knowledge, experience, qualifications, ability and some time spare that are passionate about obtaining Equality In a Justice system that currently ignores the rule of law causing illegal judgements and miscarriages in justice for many without sufficient finances to challenge.

Without knowing the details of the case, the only advice I can give you is that you shouldn't let this consume your life.

Everyone in the legal system (judges, lawyers, CAB advisers) mostly do their best, but the system is not perfect and people do not get it right all of the time. There is also a lot of subjectivity in these cases: what feels like unfair dismissal to you, might not be unfair dismissal to somebody else.

There does come a point where it is better to accept things as they are and move on with your life than to let a dispute prey on your mind for years and years. Once you've been through a tribunal/court process they can sleep knowing you've done all you reasonably could to stand up for yourself even if you don't get the outcome you want.