pre hearing tribunal help please

[Lanney50]

Hi just recieved date for pre hearing,Union have now told me they wont represent me so having to go solo,very scary,any help and advice on this procedure would be gratefully accepted,what documents would I need to supply fo hearing have just rang the center to see if possible I could sit in on a pre hearing to know what to expect ,but just wondered if anyone else has gone through similar any help please thanks

[SarEl]

They won't let you sit in on a pre-hearing - they are confidential! Can you please clarify some points:

 

(a) is this a pre-hearing review or a case management discussion?

(b) why did the union pull representation?

[Lanney50]

thanks for the response Sarl mine is a pre hearing,and the unioun solicitors have said they wont take the case on as they dont believe its a strong case,they didnt say I didnt have a case, just said no case to answer ,I believe you have spoken on this case to partner before today xxxxxxxxx,you gave great advice which was very benifical ,but unioun have pulled support so will have to go it alone ,I have rang the tribunal services and they said I can sit in on a tribunal case tommorow ,this I think will be helpful so I know what to expect,as Im terrified,going it alone,Im up against a big company and they will be well represented,feel like going into the lions den ,the yribunal letter for me is a -pre hearing ''

[honeybee13]

Hi Lanney, welcome to the forum.

 

I have no experience of ETs, but I know from reading the forum that people have represented themselves and done well. SarEl has said, as have others, that ET judges normally try to help claimants who are representing themselves. There are threads on the forum that you can look at - I imagine you have the time? - that can give you an idea of how to prepare. I expect there will be advice from forum members who know more than I do.

 

My best, HB

[Lanney50]

thanks any help gratefully accepted,thanks for your response

[honeybee13]

Well I hope we can help you. To find other threads about ETs, or maybe other search terms, you need to come out of this thread and go back to the Employment title page. Scroll up until you find the Forum Search tool, then you can check out threads that might relate to yours. You may need to adjust what you search for, and make sure you only look at threads and posts that are on the Employment forum [maroon letters].

 

My best, HB

[SarEl]

If this is a pre-hearing review then I am afraid that it may be trouble. A pre-hearing review is to determine whether there is a case to answer or some other point of law, generally around the admissability of the case, elements of the case, or evidence. You will certainly need to take everything you have with you, and be prepared to argue your legal psoition. You should have been informed - either in a CMD or by letter - what points the pre-hearing review will be considering. But if you are correct in what you say this meeting is, then it will be a full legal hearing on the relevant points, and loosing this would very possibly wipe out part or all of your claim. Pre-hearing reviews (as opposed to CMD's) are much less common and a judge normally only orders one if he thinks that the points raised have some merit and demand consideration.

 

You must listen very carefully to what the judge tells you - especially if this is a PHR. Proceeding with something that the judge tells you not to is very real grounds for cost orders.

 

I am extremely unclear about what you say the union solicitor has said. "No case to answer" means you have no case. Did they say that there was no case to answer???

 

I cannot trace back where other details may have been posted about this since they were not posted by you, so obviously I can't comment on the actual case.

[madari]

They won't let you sit in on a pre-hearing - they are confidential! Can you please clarify some points:

 

(a) is this a pre-hearing review or a case management discussion?

(b) why did the union pull representation?

 

Hi, I think SarEl for once you are wrong.

 

Pre hearing reviews[PHR] and Case management meetings [CMD] are both open to the public,at least the ones I have attended have been open to the public.

[SarEl]

CMD's are open to the public. PHR's are only open to the public if the parties agree, and as a general rule they don't. Certainly in the cases I manage, I would never agree. They are the equivalent of "judge in chambers" hearings, as part of a main trial and contain legal argument which is not, and should not be, in the public domain. If you have gained permission to attend a PHR you are very fortunate.

[madari]

CMD's are open to the public. PHR's are only open to the public if the parties agree, and as a general rule they don't. Certainly in the cases I manage, I would never agree. They are the equivalent of "judge in chambers" hearings, as part of a main trial and contain legal argument which is not, and should not be, in the public domain. If you have gained permission to attend a PHR you are very fortunate.

 

Thanks for that info, i will object to any unwanted witness presence next time, I automatically assumed that PHR`s were public hearings and so went along not knowing defending my claim on numerous occassions.

[SarEl]

I am surprised that you were not asked! But I would advise trying to avoid any hearings of any type in the future - it leads to a more peaceful life!

[madari]

I am surprised that you were not asked! But I would advise trying to avoid any hearings of any type in the future - it leads to a more peaceful life!

Yes I fully agree with you,I was referring to an upcoming PHR that I am attending.

[SarEl]

Is the OP going to come back wih more information?

[Lanney50]

good evening all thanks for your advice to date,I did sit in on a pre hearing today and found it very helpful,it lasted 4 hours and although some of the claim was different to mine the information I have gained was invaluable,I now need to set out a witness statement and also a skeleton argument ,this I will look for help and guidance on various sites,the whole process today has helped me understand the process and what to expect,also the claimant today was very helpful and told me a couple of sitesI might look up for guidance,and sorry Sarl but do I need to take a shedule of loss to my pre hearing ,I havent been asked for one at this stage

[SarEl]

No need to apologise - but I am giving advice "blind" here! If you haven't been asked for a schedule of loss, the you don't need one yet.

 

PS _ by the way. You were very fortunate to get into a PHR as an observer this quickly. There are not many held ever because they are not needed in 99% of cases, and more often than not the parties object to observers. And only yesterday you posted about PHR's - most people can't get the tribunal office to pick up the phone in that amount of time!!! Perhaps you could let people in on the secret - do you live next door to the tribunal office

Edited January 28, 2011 by SarEl

[Lanney50]

goodnevening all I just rang the tribunal office and asked when the next meeting would be they were very helpful and said to ring back at 4.30pm which I did and was lucky enough to be able to attened one the next morning which ea great it turned out to be a pre hearing which as you rightly said both parties were hapy for me to sit in on ,they claimant even offerd advice after the meeting ,I was very glad I went as i now know what to expect,I now just need how to find out how to submit a a skelton argument ,and a witness statement which Im now scouring the net for ,so yes I was indeed very fortunate,the tribunal office was very very helpful.

[ms_smith]

CMD's are open to the public. PHR's are only open to the public if the parties agree, and as a general rule they don't. Certainly in the cases I manage, I would never agree. They are the equivalent of "judge in chambers" hearings, as part of a main trial and contain legal argument which is not, and should not be, in the public domain. If you have gained permission to attend a PHR you are very fortunate.

 

I think you are guys both wrong.

My own CMD was scheduled by ET as private, then the PHR was open to the public. A few days before my PHR, I attended two other PHRs, on the same day, as a spectator, so I guess it is purely a matter of ET' decision how to conduct the meetings, in general.

[SarEl]

I am quite sure that tribunal rules are as I stated. A tribunal judge can determine that a CMD ought to be held in private - although it is unusual. PHR's should be open only with the agreement of the parties - but the ones you attended may well have agreed (or were not asked, which they ought to be). Because PHR's deal with matters of law and jurisdiction, public hearings can prejudice the case if they are disclosed, and that means a call on on an EAT or higher. It may be that since tribunals are often relaxed, in your case this wasn't deemed a risk. In many of my cases it is a risk because of the profile of the cases. Which is why I refuse. But then, most claimants are not represented by barristers and don't need to be. When they are, it is usually a mark of the potential profile of the case.

[R&J]

Unions are shocking. Their solicitors will usually drop a case unless it absolutely certain to win.

 

Don't think that just because your union tells you your claim is rubbish then it is destined to lose. I have taken many a claim abandoned by the union and got a good result for the client.

[SarEl]

Unions are shocking. Their solicitors will usually drop a case unless it absolutely certain to win.

 

Don't think that just because your union tells you your claim is rubbish then it is destined to lose. I have taken many a claim abandoned by the union and got a good result for the client.

 

That is something of an over statement. Unions win many cases, both with employers and with tribunals. Nobody would claim they are perfect - but as the evidence shows, neither are lawyers!