Employment Tribunal - Advise Needed

[cardiffboy500]

If the deposit is ordered, is it means tested?

[Bigredbus]

Hi,

 

A judge would order a party to pay a deposit upon considering that the contentions put forward by a party have little reasonable prospect of success...

 

However, relatively few of these orders have been made...

[cardiffboy500]

Hi,

 

A judge would order a party to pay a deposit upon considering that the contentions put forward by a party have little reasonable prospect of success...

 

However, relatively few of these orders have been made...

 

 

Ok, thanks BRB!!

[wobbly]

subbing

[cardiffboy500]

Hello Caggers

 

So we have a time and date for a PHR.

 

The instruction is - 'You may submit written representations for consideration at the hearing...no less than 7 days before the hearing.'

 

I have already submitted significant evidence with my ET1, and written documentation between the ET being accepted and today. Do I need to re-submit this again before the hearing, or can I use this evidence if needed without submitting it again, as it has already been presented to all parties at an earlier date.

 

Thanks

 

CB500

[cardiffboy500]

Time for an update

 

Well we had the PHR on Friday, and boy was it interesting!

 

On the morning of the hearing the clerk gave me a copy of prepared statement and evidence that the Respondent was going to use. Luckily our case was now going to be heard second that day, so I had a few hours to read through this new evidence.

 

At the hearing the Judge determined that there is indeed sufficient proof of alleged discrimination - referring to the letter of regret supplied by the Respondent, therefore there is a case to be discussed.

 

With reference to the deposit order, as I had produced evidence in my claim, there was no reason as to why this case should be viewed as vexatious and the deposit order was refused.

 

Finally the debate about who the correct Respondents should be, it was ordered by the judge that the original 2 respondents should remain on the case, and the 3rd Respondent added and there eveidence, albeit late, should be accepted.

 

Now for the juicy bits....

 

During the hearing, the respondent struggled to control his temper, and had little rants on a regular basis, including with the Judge!! But during one of these, he called me a "well known litigant". Now as this is my first (and hopefully last) ET case, I am not sure on what grounds he can make such a statement??

 

Secondly, and quite importantly, in his written statement and evidence he provided, there are a number of irregularities and contradictions with what has been said previously. These include:

 

* On the ET3 he has stated - The interviews were conducted in one single afternoon with a single second interview two days later. Yet on the written statement - There were 5 applicants in total, one of which entered the process late on (who ultimately got the job). Mr ABC (who got the job) was interviewed 2 weeks after the initial applicants.

 

* He has produced for the court a copy of the 'score sheet' he claims to have used to assess the potential of each applicant. However I feel very strongly that these are forged, he claims to have completed them from the notes he took during the interview (although he destroyed the notes so cant provide those). The information on these sheets is very generic and very unspecific.

 

The claim will now be heard at a full hearing at the end of the year. I am thinking of getting some legal advise now, even just to look through all the paperwork and point me in the right direction. Money is really tight though, so I am following up on a couple of leads that a friend has given me for free advise.

 

Thanks

 

CB500

[cardiffboy500]

Hello Caggers, it has been some time since I logged in here, I have been moving house and job and loads of other things. Well last week has the Tribunal...

 

After some frantic last minute attempts by the respondent to have the hearing postponed, the hearing proceeded. The respondent, who was representing all 3 respondents, chose not to attend, but the tribunal proceeded anyway.

 

The outcome - the panel ruled that there is a very clear case of discrimination relating to age against me, and upheld my application. The judge was scathing of the respondents approach to the entire process, and awarded loss of earning, hurt to feelings, compensation for victimisation and unusually an award for aggravated damages - totalling a touch under £20k. I am of course very pleased, but fear that we have an appeal and battle to get the money.

 

CB500

[papasmurf1cx]

Hi this is good news......... even if you do think an an appeal will be lodged. Can I suggest you PM SarEl on the forum if that happens. She is an Employment barrister and will help if she can. I have great respect for her and I am sure after contact you will too.

 

I think you have done great to fight this discrimination.

[SarEl]

There is little real prospect of an appeal. Appeals to the EAT are only permitted on grounds of law, not on the basis of an outcome not being liked, and judging by the posts it would appear that that is unlikely. Getting the money may be more of a problem because companies such as this are known to simply wind up their affairs and become insolvent overnight to avoid paying. I would therefore suggest that you start chasing payment as soon as possible.

[honeybee13]

Hello again and well done you . I hope you get the money paid.

 

My best, HB

[dannysport]

well done