I have recently submitted an application to the employment appeal tribunal on legal grounds, perversity and bias. The ET did not follow the law, the decision was totally perverse, and the judge had connections with the employer and the defence who is also an employment law judge.

I am still awaiting response to the application and have been informed that this has been looked at by four judges and is awaiting a fifth judge.

From what I read this is normally only looked at by the judge or registrar at the EAT.

Is it normal for five judges to look at it before making decision as to avenue it takes?

Why are five judges looking into it?

The information you have provided is quite vague. Am I correct to think you submitted an appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal?

See the information here: http://www.justice.gov.uk/tribunals/employment-appeals/hearings. As far as I am aware there are five judges at the EAT, although hearings would normally be conducted by a single judge.

Yes an appeal has been submitted to the EAT and I have included case law, proof of bias and perverse evidence and new evidence that supports this beyond any reasonable doubt and am now awaiting there response. I can't go into much detail other than the grounds as this would identify too much. When speaking to the EAT advisor they have informed me that this has been looked at by 4 of the judges and now has to be looked at by the 5th judge before the decision regarding the application is made. This seems unusual as it seems to be usually a single judge that decides the sift of applications, though I am assuming taht they are having difficulty in deciding how to deal with it as what has happened also now contravenes article six.

Is this so unusual that noone knows the answer?

It certainly isn't common, no EAT is, but I am not sure why it seems to trouble you. They have said 5 will look at it, so five will, and when they have, they will get back to you.

Don't expect anything pacey! The EATs are mainky busy with people who just won't take "no" for an answer, regardless of merits. There are surpisingly large numbers of them...

Is this so unusual that noone knows the answer?

Which tribunal was this heard at, the defence lawyer in my case is also an EJ so was slightly sceptical

hi kgrayson sent you friends request will send you mail

hi kgrayson sent you friends request will send you mail

Ok thanks, friends request on here? Can't see it

kgrayson for some reason it is not letting me request you peraphs you can send me friend request

kgrayson cant seem to add you or mail you. At hearing judge declared an interest as a close relative worked for the respondent, defence barrister did not provide any legal argument which surprised me I did provide legal argument including case law and in reserved judgement evidence was changed and ommitted to fit defendant so I was suspicious and checked out the defending barrister and learnt that he is a part time employment judge in south london and has addressed employment judges at conference

kgrayson cant seem to add you or mail you. At hearing judge declared an interest as a close relative worked for the respondent, defence barrister did not provide any legal argument which surprised me I did provide legal argument including case law and in reserved judgement evidence was changed and ommitted to fit defendant so I was suspicious and checked out the defending barrister and learnt that he is a part time employment judge in south london and has addressed employment judges at conference

A lot of part time judges are barristers, I wouldn't draw any negative inference from that alone

it is not that alone becky, the content does not comply with employement law and lot was missing and changed, it was because of the content that i checked him out