Employment tribunal case - respondent making libelous claims about me

[professional1964]

Hi

I am taking my ex employer to Tribunal. However, their legal representative to me seems to be making a complete mess of things. They are making libelous statements about me in writing.

 

a) They said I emailed somebody and called them a s**t. This simply did not happen and obviously technology can prove that I have never emailed any person and called them that.

 

b) They said I have "threatened many employees for witness statements", which I have not. I have only contacted one employee and sent a very nice message and this can be proven.

 

c) They said I have emailed somebody and said "Kiss her arse", another lie.

 

d) They said I have passed false information to third parties about the company - another lie

 

e) That I downloaded the websites that another employee had "viewed" and sent them to my own personal email address.

 

There are a few more too, but I can't think of them all. I want to sue my ex employer or their legal people for libel.

 

My husband is against it and says we have enough going on with the Tribunal.

 

How would I go about this if I did decide to do this. Would I have to notify the Tribunal and do you think a "no win no fee" solicitor would be interested as in my opinion it would be an easy case to win as each thing can be proven to be a lie.

 

Any thoughts please.

thank you

Edited March 6, 2012 by citizenB
spacing for easier reading

[madari]

I suggest you google the most recent case law which applies to your concerns:

 

Google:Parmer v East Leicester medical centre UKEAT/0490/10/JOJ and the cases relied on within this judgment.

 

I am afraid the only way to discredit the `lies` in a court of law is by producing documentary evidence.

Edited March 6, 2012 by madari

[professional1964]

Hi Thank you for your response.

I have documentary evidence that they have lied i.e. they have typed it in various correspondence etc. Isn't that enough evidence. And if they say they aren't lying they would have to prove it surely?

I will look at the caselaw you recommended thank you

[madari]

Hi

 

If you have documentary evidence then that is good but you cannot sue them for libel.

 

As for `no win no fee solicitors` I would stay well and truly clear from them.

 

Good luck

[professional1964]

What can I sue them for - I thought libel was lies??

[madari]

Hi

 

If my understanding is correct then you are already sueing them by taking them to tribunal.

 

You cannot have two bites of the cherry.

[professional1964]

No, I think you misunderstood me. I am taking them to Tribunal for Constructive Dismissal due to harassment and sexual harassment. It is since I resigned and left that the libel has started. I suppose it is just more harassment, but they are lying and I didn't think the Tribunal would consider anything after I left.

[madari]

Oh ,so are you saying that all the things that you state in your opening post are meant to have occurred after your resignation?

[stu007]

Hi

 

As this is an ET Claim give them a call and ask there advice on you requesting documentry evidence to each of their claims.

 

I am sure you are allowed to request this evidence of their claims but others will advise on this here.

[madari]

Hi Stu,

 

The ET is not an advisory service,neither do they provide any advice.

[professional1964]

Yes, these are things they have stated since I resigned and left. They are not the reasons I resigned for. Surely it is libel. I know witnesses are protected if they give witness statements, but surely in emails they are sending to the Tribunal lying about me it must be libel.

[professional1964]

Oh so I shouldn't call and ask them then?

[stu007]

Hi madari

 

I did not say they were an Advisory Service but the op can call for adivce on the Et Claim and that they are following correct procedure and whether the op can request the documentation from employer to their claims against op thats all.

[professional1964]

I have already reported them to the ICO for tampering with the Transcript of the meeting. They say I didn't mention "sexual harassment" and I did, but it was conveniently one of the things they didn't type up when typing up the transcript. I listened to the tape and did a total of 5 A4 pages of amendments. Things they had conveniently missed out. Also the Appeal meeting transcript had the first part of the meeting missing. The list of things they have done just goes on and on, but I cannot stand the lies. I really need to try and shake the legal employment company up a little so they stop making these false allegations about me.

[professional1964]

I will call them tomorrow - they may be able to advise me

[Sidewinder]

Suing for libel is a rich man's game. It has a very high burden of proof, and even where this exists, the likely return from a successful action would most likely not cover your costs. Headline cases always involve high profile personalities with many millions of pounds worth of contracts at risk, and the average person, although wronged would be very unlikely to be judged to have suffered a financial loss. Libel would also involve the broadcast of defamatory material to a wider audience than the individual concerned, so for as long as any untruths are communicated to you and not in public, then it would not be actionable.

 

Best advice for this is to use the letter(s) in your action, together with the proof of their falsehood to underline your case.

[madari]

If you are acting in person then you need to write to the respondents and ask for all documents that the wish to rely on and give them 14 days from the date of the letter to respond.

 

As for libel `forget it`, have you not read the Parmer case law?

[professional1964]

Sidewinder, would the Tribunual be considered "public" as that is whom they have emailed these false allegations to. They said I acted in the dishonest guise of an employee (I called an I.T. company for information re something they are denying and I asked if the conversation was being recorded. When they said 'yes' I said 'good' and then I told them that "I used to work for ******" They then freely gave me the information I needed to prove part of my claim. They found out about it and then accused me of acting as an employee, but that is why I asked if the telephone conversation was being recorded because I knew they would make false accusations. Thereby if I can get that taped conversationd disclosed by order of th eTribunal I can prove they are lying. So are the Tribunal classed as "public"

[gezwee]

It's 2 years since my experience of an ET but........ I don't believe s.10 has been amended [check before steaming in though ]

 

Apply to the tribunal for disclosure pursuant to s.10(2)d, if they've made allegations they should be pressed to support same by disclosure.

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/1861/schedule/1/made

 

Gez

[Sidewinder]

No - as far as I am aware, statements made in, or to a Court are subject to privilege, and cannot be defamatory. Untruths made to a court are more a matter of perjury, but do you really want to go down that road? Probably best to accept this for what it is and use it against them in the right way - concentrate on the case in hand and accept that in legal matters people attempt to play dirty.

[madari]

Hi Gezwee

 

You have to put the respondents on notice first before you can apply to the ET for a disclosure request.

[gezwee]

Hi Gezwee

 

You have to put the respondents on notice first before you can apply to the ET for a disclosure request.

 

Thanks M, did say it had been 2 years

 

Gez

[becky2585]

The action you are referring to is a defamation claim. And as PPs have confirmed, no, you can't sue them in this case, or rather it's highly unlikely. Of course, you could spend thousands of pounds in the high court if you wanted, but it wouldn't be advised.

[honeybee13]

Hello there.

 

If you want to test out your theory about NWNF representation for a libel case, for the cost of a few phone calls you could ring a few local ones and see what they say. They should be willing to speak to you briefly on the phone to get an idea of whether you have a case.

 

My best, HB

[professional1964]

Thank you. In effect it is perjury then as they have told a lie to the court? It is all very confusing. Hopefully I will win the lottery so I can pay a top solicitor to defend me; but in the meantime I am just going to hope that honesty is the best policy and that I will win by fair means not foul.

all your advice is much appreciated