Employment Tribunal - you CAN win !!!

[billybobynumeroduo]

if you are accusing judges of taking backhanders you're going to need more than a gut feel to back up that claim. I for one am not going to take part in a discussion based on factless sweeping generalizations. If you have actual evidence of wrong doing by lawyers the escalation route is the law society.

 

To be entirely comprehensive another edition to the equation: J+T+E+S+B+LS> C

[Emmzzi]

As you know, I don't do academic debates, only real life cases with solid questions. Therefore, I'm out.

 

Be careful the two of you not to get yourselves into hot water by throwing accusations about!

[smokejumper]

What surprises me when I spoke to the judge at my PHR he said we are not here to punish the employer.

 

Well the employer is there because I allege they broke a law, if I subsequently prove they broke that law, then people that break laws should be punished, otherwise they will re offend.

[sheiladip]

Hi Sheila,

 

I read your response have yet to read your blog!

 

You say you intend to appeal....what point of law are you appealing on....Perversity?

Even if perversity is proved and established, it can be a huge obstacle to overcome and sway the judge/ your case to a favorable outcome.

 

At what stage of the appeal are you exactly? Have you been granted an appeal? Have you been granted an oral hearing 3(10)

 

I am going to back you if you want to go for the appeal. What do you intend to do after the appeal if you lose, or you don't make it through to the next stage.

 

Would be interested to know where you are in the scheme of things.

 

I wont beat around the bush and I am surprised no one else on here is saying it:

 

 

An employment tribunal which is running off of funding from the big businesses.

A. Whose interest does it serve?

 

Those who are putting in to it? or those who want to take (legitimately, and IMO have every right to might I add)

 

-Let me rehash and rejig what all the members on this forum are saying: The Judges/ Tribunal and Employers (J+T+E) are basically on the same side.

 

-You and me and everyone else on here is on the other side. The scales are hardly equally balanced.

 

You really need a clear cut case which is blatant discrimination for the judge to side with you and, in effect, chastise one of their own.

 

Good luck people

 

 

I attended a 3(10) 30th May 2013....The Recorder told me that an appeal on perversity was impossible. I requested an independent and impartial assessment of my claim. He opened the hearing assuring me of this. Then in the transcript he lists all the refusals I have had, including from the Respondent while I was employed - and uses these as a reason to refuse my appeal. I recently told my GP this and her reaction was the same as any 'fair minded' person....what is the point of an appeal?

My witness statement and the evidence I cited was ignored. The tribunal judge repeated a statement made by the witness as 'evidence.' She was the person who took the decision to dismiss me. There is no evidence cited in her witness statement, only unsubstantiated sweeping statements and a reference to some pages in the investigation report. I gave several examples of the evidence that was supposed to back up this report, and it is quite the opposite, it actually supports my case. The Appeal Tribunal Judge agreed that I had given sufficient 'sample acts of those complained of.' I found this expression in a case that I read, but then could not find it to quote directly. He recognised the phrase.

The Appeal Tribunal Judge repeated the same sentence from the Respondent's witness. The jargon is: 'by assertion only.'

 

I have submitted a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeal. I will put this on my blog. It is largely the same as the notice of appeal made to the Employment Appeal Tribunal. The EAT judge did not address any of the points I put forward. I am expecting a refusal any day. I checked that it was being dealt with after reading the recent case which came under the heading 'justice delayed is justice denied.' I made an application for a limitation of costs under CPR 52.9A. I have also requested the judges' notes of evidence, which is essential for an appeal based on perversity.

The purpose behind this application is to continue with my story. It is virtually impossible for someone of modest means to progress to the Court of Appeal, and the tribunal judges know this. I am also hopeful that there might be some reasonable, fair minded judges who will read my appeal.

The Appeal document is quite long, but if you take time to read it you will see that is is a complex case!

Thank you for your interest.

Sheila

[wildm]

Someone on one of these things said I was lying/making, they simply could not believe it. Well neither can I which is why I will never ever stop. Atrocious practices will continue, so when I do stop it will be because things have been fully righted or I am dead. I too am apparently "unemployable" so be it, rather that than let injustice prevail and remain silent. The term is actually black-listed, starved into submission. I spent 33 years' of my life employed by the same people and am a little further along the line than you having exhausted the EAT and JR system. This site was infiltrated by my ex employer or their legal people when I consulted it prior to my Tribunal, the costs judge said I didn't have to pay that bit! Continue to fight the good fight. The systems in place are certainly not fair the EAT in London is as flawed as the ET but something you have to go through. The subsequent JR, though less hostile, was equally useless. I have no option but to fully exhaust their systems, Hillsborough, Lawrence and Savile took 20 years' to be exposed continue to fight the good fight or become bitter.

[sheiladip]

Someone on one of these things said I was lying/making, they simply could not believe it. Well neither can I which is why I will never ever stop. Atrocious practices will continue, so when I do stop it will be because things have been fully righted or I am dead. I too am apparently "unemployable" so be it, rather that than let injustice prevail and remain silent. The term is actually black-listed, starved into submission. I spent 33 years' of my life employed by the same people and am a little further along the line than you having exhausted the EAT and JR system. This site was infiltrated by my ex employer or their legal people when I consulted it prior to my Tribunal, the costs judge said I didn't have to pay that bit! Continue to fight the good fight. The systems in place are certainly not fair the EAT in London is as flawed as the ET but something you have to go through. The subsequent JR, though less hostile, was equally useless. I have no option but to fully exhaust their systems, Hillsborough, Lawrence and Savile took 20 years' to be exposed continue to fight the good fight or become bitter.

 

I would like to know the details of your case. I would like to know who you have complained to so far and what responses you have had. When I complain to those in authority, they re phrase my complaint and tell me they cannot give legal advice or influence the handling or outcome of my case. I have continually repeated that I am only using examples from my own case, because firstly, that is where my experience lies, and secondly it provides a clear example of the gross injustice that is taking place. I want to list cases that have been dismissed on mantras - not applying the facts of the case to the caselaw quoted. Read my blog - How ridiculous is this? I have attempted to make disclosures but they are re labelled as complaints of 'personal misconduct ' of a judge. One was investigated by a regional judge. when he sent me his result...that there was no personal misconduct, I replied telling him that this was not my complaint, he was given the wrong remit - giving inadequate reasons is clearly professional negligence or misconduct. We all have a right to know why we have won or lost. He responded and conceded that he saw my point.

Most of the problem lies with the judges not complying with their duty to give adequate reasons. One of the cases quoted regularly is 'Meek'.

In order for an Employment Tribunal judgment to be "Meek compliant" (ie provide adequate information) it must explain why the evidence of one party is preferred to that of another and, if appropriate to the case, why the evidence of a witness whose credibility was not questioned is rejected.

In the reasons given to me no evidence has been referred to, only a statement from the respondent's witness. The reasons do not comply with this precedent as was asserted. To anyone not working in the legal sector, 'Meek' is just describing plain, natural justice. Would you complain if your child was put in detention and the teacher refused to explain to anyone why?

I totally agree with you. When anyone tells me to drop it, I explain that it would be more frustrating to me and cause even more stress. I know people who have done this and they are very bitter. You need to channel the energy from the 'stress' while being aware that you cannot change things overnight.

I was advised by a friend to compartmentalise it - so that it does not dominate my life. It was difficult when I had deadlines. Also I 'ground' myself regularly. There are people fighting battles for their rights everywhere - just look at victimsunited website.

I found this comment on the website: it puts things in perspective - my take on it is that the internet is mightier than the pen!

Maureen Jenner The gradual drip, drip of water made stalagmites;

maureenjenner*commented*on*Vexatious Litigants.

in response to*Sabine Kurjo McNeill:

If you start out as a victim, you may become a litigant in person because you can’t afford a lawyer or got cheated by one or more or found them incompetent. However, you then run the risk of becoming a “vexatious litigant”. You may want to wear this title with pride. But read here how [...]

The sense of frustration and injustice is palpable in these letters. It is not enough that those who so blatantly pervert the course of justice fail to realise what they are doing, but make huge profits out of doing it.

It is of some comfort that word is spreading through the internet, and the news of these misdeeds is percolating through to people in other countries. As long as we keep fuelling the flow of information regarding these abominations of injustice, despite the machinations of their perpetrators, we can ensure victory for the victims – eventually.

The gradual drip, drip of water made stalagmites; gradual erosion by river water resulted in the Grand Canyon. The saddest fact to be faced is that our lives do not stretch to such longevity; too many will never live to see the justice they deserve – and that is the greatest injustice, as well as the greatest evil.

It is also a mark of the shame and degradation to which those who, having sworn to uphold the law, are reneging on that oath. No one who turns their back on victims deserves to be regarded as great, whatever their title. It is the people who make the country; they are the ones called upon to risk, and give, their lives in the service of the monarch and the country.

For this reason, those who live in, and with, great privilege, must be more accountable. It’s not enough to claim non-involvement in political matters. The appointments of judges is still the prerogative of the monarch; on the recommendation of the prime minister of the day. Claiming ignorance holds no water now; if we can find out these matters via the internet, then so can those who live in palaces.

 

I am one of these drips .....I need some more to join me!!!

[rightsforme]

Well done sheila I will certainly be looking at your site and would most certainly employ you if I were an employer. I am helping a friend with appeal which is most definately a misscarriage of justice and leads me to have no faith in the justice system for when it invloves well know companies that judges have strong family connections with and judges presenting to a fellow judge. Appearance of bias most definate, ignoring legislation and factual evidence making findings of fact on non factual evidence of those employers most definately substitution for respondent etc etc i could go on. I am challenging such a case at present which i never expected to have to do as this had much more evidence than my own tribunal which I won within half an hour of start and was on constructive dismissal and one of the hardest to prove as evidence was merely my word against theres and the case im assisting with has so much factual evidence and case law which proves it yet here I am having to take matters further to try and obtain justice. If this was a criminal case it would never stand any chance whatsoever and does not allow a person to claim a verbal allegation was made to them from a third party and find a person guilty without investigating and obtaining witness statements to support that an allegation has been made and not giving a person an opportunity of defense is against the rules of natural justice that we all have rights too.

[rightsforme]

Well said and Snap I intend to take it higher too and will continue to fight to expose and stop this happening to others.

[sheiladip]

When I found this thread I recommended Edward Jacob's book -' Tribunal Procedures and Practice.' I have spent hundreds of pounds on books and this was the only one that was useful. But, as I keep saying, it might as well be fiction.

I have read so much 'caselaw' but as I said to a judge at the EAT - he can find one to dismiss my case, but I am confident that I could find three to support it. ( which I did, but mine don't count) There is a section in Jacob's book that explains that caselaw or 'precedents' are guidelines only. They are not supposed to be used as hard and fast laws, set in stone.

I have quoted from Lord Justice Underhill in:

Council of the City of Newcastle Upon Tyne v Mr J Marsden, ( Appeal No. UKEAT/0393/09/CEA)

There is in this field as in others a tendency – often denounced but seemingly ineradicable - for broad statutory discretions to become gradually so encrusted with case-law that decisions are made by resort to phrases or labels drawn from the authorities rather than on a careful assessment of what justice requires in the particular case.

 

I can identify with this directly. I can show that in every decision I have been given, cases have been quoted but not applied to the facts of my case. The phrases and labels alone have been used.

It would seem that there has been no improvement since 2009.

 

When I try to report the injustice my complaint is rephrased and directed to another person - who repeats this. I have explained that I am only using examples from my case because this is my experience to date AND of course that the refusals I have had, with NO reasons given seem to be widespread and accepted by those in the legal profession. That is why I want to draw examples from other people's cases. I said at the beginning - all I need to do is find a judge who will listen to the truth and is loyal to his/ her oath. I have yet to find one. I am at the last hurdle now.

 

If you have any 'reasons' from judges that I can look at I would be interested. The ones I have been given are just 'conclusions.' I continued to ask for the reason and the evidence that they relied on but this , and my persistence in pursuing my claim labelled me as 'vexatious.'

I read in one of my other law books that 'a right to a fair trial' under human rights only applies to criminal law. It did not say why. I can't see why this is 'the law' as no fair minded person would agree with this. If it is another get out clause for the judges to use it needs to be changed.

Another habit I have, which seems to antagonise judges are my questions about the 'overriding interests of justice' and why they cannot be applied to my case! One judge even put in her 'reasons' that I did not understand why this could not apply to my case - but she did not go on to explain why. The lawyers I have spoken to all just looked at me as if I was so naive and said that they only exist on paper.

It must be in the overriding interests of justice to allow a fair trial.

[wildm]

At the moment I am awaiting responses from MP's they are now over a month old. I initially sent them myself but was ignored apparently you have to ask questions through your local MP or there will be "chaos". The conclusion I am now forced to take is that local MP's are also ignored when the questions are too hard to answer. All I can say is when faced with a gargantuan task just keep nibbling away at it.

[SweetLorraine]

Hi sheiladip,

 

thanks for the posts - some useful info. in there.

 

Just a thought - you might like to start an e-petition on HMG's website - the narrative allowed is somewhat cramped (>1,000 spaces) - but it might be good for the soul? http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/

 

I found it can be difficult to discuss these matters clearly when you have personally been humiliated by the ET process - there can be too much of you and your emotions getting in the way of salient points. I probably sounded unhinged to friends I talked too about my claim - perhaps I was - the prospect of bringing a claim unrepresented was unnerving - however the bedlam of the ET with its good/bad judges, flat-lining civil service 'support' staff (a risible term) and dodgy respondents was a whole new strange insanity.... which could tip many a sane person over the edge a bit.... or maybe further still.

 

There are also so many nuances and quirks attached to individual claims that I'm not sure how you can provide clear 'sightlines' to the issues you wish to address (and engage potential readers/supporters) while there is so much of your own claim shot through it. Can you separate the two and be more objective? The cream from the milk if you like.

 

Can you clearly articulate what you want to achieve in less than approx. 150 words (i.e. less than 1,000 spaces)? If you can, the e-petition might be the way to go.

 

By whatever route you choose, it is going to be a long slog - is this how you want to spend your time and energy? What if you don't succeed? Will any of it bring you peace of mind?

Edited November 21, 2013 by SweetLorraine

[wildm]

I did one of those once it was about honesty in the Civil Service ha ha. Emotion and the sheer monotony of having to explain everything numerous times and the little interest paid to detail by those making judgements are the things that undo. So many wrongs which to fasten on. it is very frustrating and all because they already know and really do not want to rectify. There is also a change now or change today which avoids the scenic route of local MP's which I will pursue asap.

[SweetLorraine]

....There is also a change now or change today which avoids the scenic route of local MP's which I will pursue asap.

 

Sorry wildm I don't understand this bit - could you clarify? Thanks.

[sheiladip]

Thank you Sweet Lorraine,

I am awaiting a response from the Court of Appeal. Meanwhile I am trying to make 'disclosures' to those in higher authority about the lack of accountability of the judges.

I have approached my own MP who forwarded my complaint/disclosure to someone in charge of the administration of tribunals - and of course got a reply that again told me that it was not under his remit - so I have written again to my MP.

Thank you for the link to the petition. It will be on my list of things to do! I will not leave any stone unturned in my quest.

I am not spending all my time on this. It does give me some peace of mind - just to know that I am doing something. Of course there are still frustrations but I spend time meditating and with my family so keep it in perspective.

 

Like wildm - I am nibbling - and hoping that it will pay off - if not I still have my story to tell.

[wildm]

Reminded my MP today.....apparently a response has been received from the Home Office!!! He has posted it to me today. Nothing from the other MP's I addressed queries to yet it seems.

[rightsforme]

When I found this thread I recommended Edward Jacob's book -' Tribunal Procedures and Practice.' I have spent hundreds of pounds on books and this was the only one that was useful. But, as I keep saying, it might as well be fiction.

I have read so much 'caselaw' but as I said to a judge at the EAT - he can find one to dismiss my case, but I am confident that I could find three to support it. ( which I did, but mine don't count) There is a section in Jacob's book that explains that caselaw or 'precedents' are guidelines only. They are not supposed to be used as hard and fast laws, set in stone.

I have quoted from Lord Justice Underhill in:

Council of the City of Newcastle Upon Tyne v Mr J Marsden, ( Appeal No. UKEAT/0393/09/CEA)

There is in this field as in others a tendency – often denounced but seemingly ineradicable - for broad statutory discretions to become gradually so encrusted with case-law that decisions are made by resort to phrases or labels drawn from the authorities rather than on a careful assessment of what justice requires in the particular case.

 

I can identify with this directly. I can show that in every decision I have been given, cases have been quoted but not applied to the facts of my case. The phrases and labels alone have been used.

It would seem that there has been no improvement since 2009.

 

When I try to report the injustice my complaint is rephrased and directed to another person - who repeats this. I have explained that I am only using examples from my case because this is my experience to date AND of course that the refusals I have had, with NO reasons given seem to be widespread and accepted by those in the legal profession. That is why I want to draw examples from other people's cases. I said at the beginning - all I need to do is find a judge who will listen to the truth and is loyal to his/ her oath. I have yet to find one. I am at the last hurdle now.

 

If you have any 'reasons' from judges that I can look at I would be interested. The ones I have been given are just 'conclusions.' I continued to ask for the reason and the evidence that they relied on but this , and my persistence in pursuing my claim labelled me as 'vexatious.'

I read in one of my other law books that 'a right to a fair trial' under human rights only applies to criminal law. It did not say why. I can't see why this is 'the law' as no fair minded person would agree with this. If it is another get out clause for the judges to use it needs to be changed.

Another habit I have, which seems to antagonise judges are my questions about the 'overriding interests of justice' and why they cannot be applied to my case! One judge even put in her 'reasons' that I did not understand why this could not apply to my case - but she did not go on to explain why. The lawyers I have spoken to all just looked at me as if I was so naive and said that they only exist on paper.

It must be in the overriding interests of justice to allow a fair trial.

 

The rights do not just apply to criminal trial they apply to all courts including tribunals. article 6 of the european convention of human rights . I dont have the exact thing to hand at the moment but as I am currently preparing skelton argument i will post further details when i get to thet section of argument as I will have to quote some of the exact phrases within article six.

 

Case law is not exactly advisory as such it will verify what the leading case is, and what is done is that each side will attempt to find case law which supports there case and attempts will be made to try to present a difference as to why that case does not apply. In my judgement the judge has admitted that the case would clearly mean unfair dismissal however he has attempted wrongly to claim a difference by wrongly misapplying the aspect of the case.

 

For example in this particular case the respondents had a legal duty to investigate further once the claimant had given a medical reason for the error he made which was being classed as misconduct. They did not so in order to find for the respondent the Judge has changed the criteria to one that would not be covered by dda or 2010 diasability, despite the fact that the respondents have conceded that the claimant is and was at all times covered which was done based on factuall sickness and work records and ommited reference to these in judgement and ommiited any mention of the detaioled questioning of these by the panel mebers and myself.

[billybobynumeroduo]

Reminded my MP today.....apparently a response has been received from the Home Office!!! He has posted it to me today. Nothing from the other MP's I addressed queries to yet it seems.

 

Hi can you elaborate on this? I am interested. How did you get your MP to escalate your matter to the Home Office. Do you know what the response was? Please fill us in!

 

Regards

 

BOB

[wildm]

The Home Office deal with Freedom of Information (FoI) requests. I complained to the Parliamentary Ombudsman (PO) first as the Home Office had not applied the DPA (Data Protection Act) correctly and as a Government Office the PO deal with that and you need your MP to sign the request to the PO. The PO refused to deal with my request as they said they had consulted their legals and it was deemed an employment matter. So I wrote to the Information Commissioner (ICO) telling them that the PO would not deal with the DPA violation and they took the case up and after the Home Office finally responded to them concurred with me that the DPA had indeed not been applied correctly. The ICO said I would receive a response from the Home Office. I received a response from the Home Office which again contained "incorrect statements". I wrote back pointing out and providing evidence of the "inaccuracies" and copying in my MP. Yesterday I received a response from Lord Taylor of Holbeach the Lord Minister and Minister for Criminal Information. The letter was very interesting and will be responded to today point by point. I will no doubt have to do this again via my MP. The denials and outright lies I am issued with continually beggar belief but I will spend yet more precious time sifting through all the previous responses, pointing out the obvious using their own quotes etc. Frankly I find it quite amazing just how many of those who judge/write letters appear to have a complete aversion to reading the papers submitted rendering their judgements/missives entirely nonsensical and contradictory. Fight the good fight and continue to nibble.....

[wildm]

I must point out the missing papers that FoI are denying me are the same ones that were purposefully kept from the Tribunal, I hope that makes a bit more sense now.

[steampowered]

FoI and DPA are very different.

 

What papers are we talking about? You generally can't use FoI to get documents relating to your individual case, that is not what FoI is for. You can use the DPA to get 'personal data' but you must file a formal DSAR first and enclose the appropriate statutory fee.

 

As there are full legal remedies designed to deal with the kind of issues discussed in this topic (i.e. an appeal mechanism for wrongly decided judgments or incorrectly held hearings; and legal mechanisms to force compliance with a DSAR or force disclosure of documents during the Employment Tribunal process) I'm not sure you will get anywhere by complaining.

[wildm]

I asked foi for stuff similar to that which David Cameron had to disclose in the Rebekah saga. Some of it incurred the cost you state. There are "procedure" as you state but they are obviously not working.......therefore there is no alternative but to complain. I am right back to where I started a very scenic route so off we go again no rest till it is corrected.

[steampowered]

Please refer to the guidance at http://www.ico.org.uk/for_organisations/freedom_of_information/guide/act#what-is-the-freedom-of-information-act-8. You should also refer to the statutory exemptions at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/43, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/40 and http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/41.

 

The long and short of it is that you cannot use FoI to request personal information. You MUST use a formal DSAR under the DPA and pay the statutory fee if the information you want to access is 'personal data', i.e. information relating to your individual case. There are also a range of other exemptions which may be relevant, including legally privileged documents (such as documents produced by the authority for the purposes of the litigation you began against them).

 

I don't know enough about the David Cameron case to comment. Even if FoI was used in this case (I'm not sure it was), there is a public interest there which I imagine is not present in the documents you are requesting. FoI was designed for documents relating to general policy, not for obtaining documents relating to individual cases.

[wildm]

Thank you for your advice. The Cameron case opened further doors for even plebs like us, which I exploited. I know the Foi and the one you pay for rules like the back of my hand it's something I have had to learn because i was fed duff info. The ICO have agreed with me, yet the letter received is feeding me the same duff info so off we go again. Very frustrating Grrrrrrrr. I think they think I will get fed up and go away............

[rightsforme]

Rule 3.10 hearing AT EAT now held, but still refused so have to go apply for leave to appeal.

 

Elass Rep was a great help and amended my application to three pages of law.

 

He explains that the error of law is that the judgement is not meek compliant as it fails to address or deal any of the issues or points of law put before it regarding the claim and omits in entirety how it made such findings based on the actual evidence before it, the evidence of which supported the claim and no tribunal on full appreciation of the evidence could come to such decision.

 

The entire judgement is perverse, it is factually incorrect and no evidence supports the findings made.

 

The omission of reference to all real factual evidence including that of a document of the respondents own evidence, clearly shows the tribunals findings are factually incorrect and questions why it chose to dismiss, ignore and failed to address the issues and ignore and dismiss real factual evidence and instead accept the respondents witnesses views of opinion evidence whose credibility is provably unreliable and were lying and gave perjured and misleading evidence, deliberately in order to pervert the course of justice.

 

The Tribunal which make factually incorrect findings by accepting the views of the respondent's witnesses which is not supported by evidence whilst dismissing and ignoring relevant factual evidence supported by statutory and case law gives the appearance of bias as the tribunal substitutes its own view for that of the respondents, which it is not allowed to do and fails address or to make findings regarding relevant matters and misapplied the law.

 

The judge additionally has a very close direct family member working for the respondent and the respondents legal representative is also an employment judge which in my opinion and others I have asked definitely leaves any fair minded person to question the possibility of Bias, questions the rules of impartiality and rights to a just and fair trial and denies natural justice and brings the judicial system into disrepute.

 

Seems perversity is not classed as a legal issue as it in failing to address the issues were before the tribunal omitting all references to the evidence presented in support and not giving reasons is classed as a meek failure to address and give reasons and not perversity, which requires the judgement to make findings in reference to the evidence perversely.

 

The Elass Rep has said I had done really well in researching and preparing the argument for my friend’s case as I had submitted a written summary and submission of the case presented, it was easy for him to identify numerous key legal errors, which the judgement addresses none of, however the EAT still refuse to address this miscarriage of justice and I am applying for leave to appeal.

 

I am determined to obtain Justice and any help regarding the appeal and where to send the various complaints to would be appreciated. I have a little better idea of how to write things but still very much a learning curve.

[billybobynumeroduo]

Hi there Rights4me,

 

if you make it to the appeal stage this will be at the Court of Appeal? I was in exactly the same position as you about 2 years ago.

I would have gone to C.A but if it werent for the potential to pay the other side's legal costs which could have run into tens of thousands!

I decided it just wasn't worth it.

 

I would say you have done well this to get to the 3(10) hearing and have heard that EAT judges are very reluctant to overturn ET judges' findings unless there is blatant perversity. Which is really hard as we all know judges are men of good character and trust-worthy people.

 

I would say be careful but if you decide to go to C.A do you have any insurance underwriting the liability for your claim as you DO NOT want to be personaly liable for costs. I know they threaten with costs to scare people off to see they they DONT get the justice they deserve however I am sure it is probably a very really scenario. I admire you having got this far but if you want to take it further MAKE SURE you have your bases covered!

 

Wishing you all the very best

 

ps (are you able to posts any of your EAT transcripts up on this forum, I would be interested to compare to mine and maybe other members would be interested?)

 

BB