Are converstions between ACAS and Lawyers protected?

[roddyn66]

I have a PHR on shortly to dicuss a time bar on a sexual Discrimination case.

 

The Respondants lawyer has lodegd papers that indicate the last event of discrimination was on say the 1st of the month that would time bar the application to the ET.

 

They have submitted over 200 pages of lodgements that have no mention of an incident on the 1st of the month beacuse there never was an incident on that date

 

I have over 1100 pages of information (which has been disclosed to the other side) and there is not a single mention of any incident on the 1st of the month.

 

Thier lawyer has contacted me (in a panic) over these date.

 

He now says that the 1st of the month date arose from conversations with ACAS during a pre hearing settlement discussion (verbal not written)

 

I canot contact the ACAS Concillator at this moment to conffirm if this is true or not.

 

However i believe that any conversations between ACAS and both parties legal representatives in relation to a settlement are without predudice and are therefore protected.

 

This of course does not remove the fact that had the correct dates of incidents been used for the application to the ET for a PHR on the grounds of a time bar, then i do not think the Chairperson would have allowed it to proceed.

 

I am on shaky ground here , but i belive that the laywer for the other side has atempted to decieve the court to secure the PHR

 

They have also used the usual application for cost, application for deposit, no reasonable chance of success etc

 

Any suggestions as to how to proceed?

 

I need help really quickly!!

[elpulpo]

Can I just clarify roddyn66, make sure I'm with ya-

 

Have you conceded to ACAS "off the record" that there are grounds for the time bar, and now seemingly ACAS has passed this on to The Respondant?

 

Sorry, I don't quite understand what's happened.

I am hungover.

[roddyn66]

No there are no grounds for a time bar at all, they say the last incident was on the 1st of the application for a PHR.

 

But in 1100 pages of evidence there is no mention of an incident on the 1st, in fact there are three incidents that are discussed in great detail over three hearings all after this 'invented' date.

 

They happened on the 3rd, 5th and 7th of the month. i have screeds of eveidence to prove this including the minutes of the greivence and the appeal

 

ACAS have only been involved in an atempt to settle prior to the ET

 

At no point in any communication with ACAS is this date of the last incident mentioned nor discussed.

 

I think thay have lied to the ET to secure a PHR and will try to use a verbal conversation with ACAS as justification for the PHR.

 

Since this is a protected conversation it canot be reffered to any way.

[elpulpo]

Right. I'm with ya. Your OP does make sense, I wasn't reading it right.

I think you've answered your own question.

There's no evidence of this incident in the minutes or any of the documents.

 

I don't know what the exact rules are regarding using what was supposedly said in ACAS mediation, whether they're without prejudice (I'd have thought so), but I think the Chairperson will wave their hand and say they don't want to know.

 

Respondants will try anything.

Apps. for PHR, costs, deposit etc. seem to be pretty much standard procedure these days.

 

Are you a litigant in person, union rep in this case?

[roddyn66]

I am representing my partner

 

Can you explain what you mean by the chairperson waving this off?

 

My challange to the vailidity of the evidence ie that it comes form protected conversations

 

or

 

the atempt by the respondants laywer to introduce it?

 

i was going to site the following in defence

 

framlington group ltd & axa framlington group ltd v barnetson

 

and

 

brunel university & schwatrz v webster & vaseghi

 

any thoughts?

[elpulpo]

Both.

The purpose of ACAS mediation is to provide a platform for the parties to resolve the issue(s) without the need to go to ET.

It shouldn't (IMO) be an opportunity for one party to try to garner something to back up their case.

 

I mean, what is the Respondant's rep planning to say?

 

"Sir! Sir!, Please Sir! I haven't got any evidence or anything, but the bloke at ACAS told me that The Applicant's rep said this, that and the other!"

 

Are they intending to call ACAS as a witness!?

 

I just don't feel the Chairperson will have any time for this at all. I doubt you'll have to argue anything. Certainly not caselaw.

 

If the incidents on the 3rd, 5th and 7th were mentioned at the grievance/appeal hearings, and the employer didn't challenge them then, I think you're perfectly safe.

[elpulpo]

I was looking on the ACAS website. There's a publication - Mediation: An Employers guide. It's mainly about workplace mediation though.

That mentions confidentiality.