Sweet Lorraine's ET thread

[lbruk]

Employment tribunals are based on "the balance of probability" not stead fast fact. Although that is nice!

 

The reaction of the tribunal would depend if you can actually 100% prove that they were lying. Ie you have something they wrote down and signed and have now stated the opposite. As the evidence in a tribunal is mainly statements that do not necessarily have the back up of hard evidence, proving that they were lying is extremely difficult and I doubt anything would be done from a criminal point of view.

[altobelli]

Extremely rare for this to happen. The only case I know of is a Scottish one where the respondent forged a document, this might be the same case becky2585 is referring to.

 

People do frequently lie at tribunal, but its difficult to prove they didn't reasonably believe they were telling the truth as opposed to deliberately lying. Judges will sometimes say in their findings that they didn't believe a plaintiff, witness or respondent, but it doesn't convert into a perjury charge. If a plaintiff or respondent is believed to be lying, it can result in costs being awarded against them though.

 

I know of another case where a witness was believed to have lied to the tribunal but the police didn't pursue a perjury charge as it was believed not to have influenced the outcome of the tribunal.

 

So sorry, this really doesn't happen often, maybe not as often as it should.

[becky2585]

Extremely rare for this to happen. The only case I know of is a Scottish one where the respondent forged a document, this might be the same case becky2585 is referring to.

 

People do frequently lie at tribunal, but its difficult to prove they didn't reasonably believe they were telling the truth as opposed to deliberately lying. Judges will sometimes say in their findings that they didn't believe a plaintiff, witness or respondent, but it doesn't convert into a perjury charge. If a plaintiff or respondent is believed to be lying, it can result in costs being awarded against them though.

 

I know of another case where a witness was believed to have lied to the tribunal but the police didn't pursue a perjury charge as it was believed not to have influenced the outcome of the tribunal.

 

So sorry, this really doesn't happen often, maybe not as often as it should.

 

Very well put!

[SweetLorraine]

Sweet Lord! In the absence of hard evidence it's down to the baloney then?

 

This Tribunal business - it's akin to swimming with red herrings in muddied waters!

 

Good job I have hard evidence then.

 

Again thanks for all the advice.

.

[altobelli]

Very well put!

 

Thanks Becky!

[SweetLorraine]

Hi,

 

on Friday the respondent has passed me a chronology of events they have submitted to the Tribunal. Suffice to say various important facts/dates are missing.

 

Can I submit my own chronology to the Tribunal?

 

Are there any other documents which I should submit to the Tribunal besides my witness statement and my share of documents which make up the bundle?

[BankFodder]

Yes. You should file a reply in which you address all th epoints made in the respondent's statement and then make any points which you feel you have to make in addition

[honeybee13]

Hi Lorraine.

 

I've merged all your threads about the ET into this one so that the information is all together. It's never good to have multiple threads and I hope this will hellp the people trying to advise you.

 

My best, HB

[SweetLorraine]

Eek, sorry for creating the extra work for you Honeybee13,

 

I thought if I kept threads subject related rather than member related then there might be topics that others could pick up on directly rather than the febrile legal fumbling of an individual.

 

SL

[honeybee13]

Eek, sorry for creating the extra work for you Honeybee13,

 

I thought if I kept threads subject related rather than member related then there might be topics that others could pick up on directly rather than the febrile legal fumbling of an individual.

 

SL

 

Hello there.

 

I can see why you would think that, but generally here it works to have one thread rather than multiples if you want holistic advice. If guys advising need to search for multiple threads to see previous information they can become disheartened. You need them to find what they need to know easily.

 

Someone look for advice on specific topics should use the Search Forum tool with the words they're looking for to bring up relevant threads.

 

HB

[SweetLorraine]

Ah, I see. Makes good sense.

 

Apologies once again HB, for being a madness in your method.

[honeybee13]

Ah, I see. Makes good sense.

 

Apologies once again HB, for being a madness in your method.

 

. Well put. It's site method rather than just mine. HB

[SweetLorraine]

Hi,

 

my witness statement has been ready for some time now - however I have yet to receive the bundle from the respondent.so that I can paginate my statement with reference to the supporting documentation in the bundle.

 

The respondent is now putting pressure on me to provide them with my witness statement prior to the bundle being collated and paginated.

 

I am right in thinking that I have every right to insist on

(i) having the bundle first, before any witness statements are exchanged? and

(ii) my statement is clearly paginated so that the Tribunal can find the supporting documentation in the bundle which verifies my statement?

[SweetLorraine]

Almost there!

 

along with the previous question above could I just ask,

when I produce the 'extra' documentation for the hearing, such as a chronology and cast list, is it the respondent's responsibility to make copies for the Tribunal hearing and circulate them or is it mine?

 

Minor points I'm sure, but I make to make sure everything is just so ahead of the hearing.

 

All advice appreciated as always of course.

[becky2585]

Almost there!

 

along with the previous question above could I just ask,

when I produce the 'extra' documentation for the hearing, such as a chronology and cast list, is it the respondent's responsibility to make copies for the Tribunal hearing and circulate them or is it mine?

 

Minor points I'm sure, but I make to make sure everything is just so ahead of the hearing.

 

All advice appreciated as always of course.

 

If your documents are part of an agreed bundle, the respondent is usually responsible for copying. If you're bringing your own supplementary evidence, it's your responsibility. You need six copies.

[SweetLorraine]

Thanks once again becky2585,

 

I'm just prepping up around the edges now. Oddly enough as I have got nearer to the hearing I have got more confident. We will see in the next month or so if that confidence was well-founded.

 

Re an earlier question, I am right in thinking I must be given the paginated bundle by the respondent so that I can insert the relevant bundle page numbers into my statement before we exchange witness statements? They seem to be insisting we exchange statements before the bundle is ready!

[becky2585]

Thanks once again becky2585,

 

I'm just prepping up around the edges now. Oddly enough as I have got nearer to the hearing I have got more confident. We will see in the next month or so if that confidence was well-founded.

 

Re an earlier question, I am right in thinking I must be given the paginated bundle by the respondent so that I can insert the relevant bundle page numbers into my statement before we exchange witness statements? They seem to be insisting we exchange statements before the bundle is ready!

 

Yes you're right - hasn't the ET ordered an agreed bundle, followed by WS exchange?

[SweetLorraine]

Yes they did,

 

I requested documentation from the respondent. They took so long to supply what was requested that we went past the original dates for the bundle to be produced and the witness statements to be exchanged. (I kept the Tribunal informed about this).

 

I tried to get the respondent to agree to a revised timetable - they ignored those efforts. The original hearing was adjourned and ahead of the new hearing date I have written to the Tribunal nine times so far requesting that the Tribunal impose a revised timetable for the exchange of lists, statements and the creation of the bundle, and, unfortunately I have not had one reply back from the Tribunal.

 

The respondent recently applied for an 'unless' order if (i) I didn't supply them with my evidence (ii) my witness statement.

 

Of course, as soon as I read that request I gave up waiting to hear back from the Tribunal and I supplied my list and documentary evidence to the respondent straightaway. The respondent did not give me a list in return and the bundle has yet to appear!

 

The Tribunal have not issued an 'unless' order. Well, not yet anyway.

[SweetLorraine]

Hi,

 

for my original hearing date the respondent quickly put together a bundle without any input from me using selective documents from my internal grievance hearing.

 

The original hearing was adjourned. Since then I have compiled my evidence and handed it over to the respondent. My documentation alone is roughly four times the size of their original bundle.

 

Close to the hearing the respondent has now refused to place any of these documents into the bundle ahead of the revised hearing.

 

I can't just turn up to the hearing with six copies of my documents which dwarf the original bundle. (I can't afford the copying if nothing else).

 

Any advice? I can't believe that the Tribunal would allow the respondent to put together a bundle with no input from the claimant and then be allowed to refuse to add the claimant's documents to the bundle.

[Pusillanimous]

It is shocking the tribunal have completely ignored you. Issue an application for non complaince with the order to agree a bundle. Explain that the respondent has failed agreed the bundle with you as ordered, list the omissions and state that the tribunal have ignnored your correspondence in the matter, dated XYZ. Label it "appplication" and send copy to both respondent and tribunal citing rule 11(4) together with case number, date of hearing and location. If it still fails, you can then appeal it with the EAT (any decision by the ET can be appealed). However, you need to make it clear to the ET it is an formal legal application (rather than a "chatty letter").

[SweetLorraine]

That advice would have helped enormously Pusillanimous.

 

The respondent wrote to me late on Monday and refused to add any of my documents to the bundle ahead of the hearing (Wednesday). The 'original' bundle was one that the respondent put together without me, with only about 15%-20% of the documents I needed.

 

I went from feeling confident to a mess very quickly. I couldn't present my case without my evidence and I still hadn't seen the opposition's five or so witness statements. I wrote to the Tribunal and asked for a decision/support on this before Tuesday evening. The Tribunal wrote back to say they were prepared to discuss all such issues on the morning of the hearing itself. Well such a hearing would have been a travesty. I saw no option but to withdraw.

 

I wish I had put up more of a fight; it was bad enough having to deal with an aggressive respondent's legal team, but having none of the crucial support from the Tribunal left me spent. Imposing a revised timetable on both sides would have flagged up/avoided these issues. The respondent pulled tricks around the bundle for the original hearing and came back with more tricks second time around. In effect I never got my chosen documents into the bundle.

 

I'm totally exhausted. Can't believe it ended like this.

[becky2585]

That advice would have helped enormously Pusillanimous.

 

The respondent wrote to me late on Monday and refused to add any of my documents to the bundle ahead of the hearing (Wednesday). The 'original' bundle was one that the respondent put together without me, with only about 15%-20% of the documents I needed.

 

I went from feeling confident to a mess very quickly. I couldn't present my case without my evidence and I still hadn't seen the opposition's five or so witness statements. I wrote to the Tribunal and asked for a decision/support on this before Tuesday evening. The Tribunal wrote back to say they were prepared to discuss all such issues on the morning of the hearing itself. Well such a hearing would have been a travesty. I saw no option but to withdraw.

 

I wish I had put up more of a fight; it was bad enough having to deal with an aggressive respondent's legal team, but having none of the crucial support from the Tribunal left me spent. Imposing a revised timetable on both sides would have flagged up/avoided these issues. The respondent pulled tricks around the bundle for the original hearing and came back with more tricks second time around. In effect I never got my chosen documents into the bundle.

 

I'm totally exhausted. Can't believe it ended like this.

 

I'm really sorry to hear that.

 

Some of my clients in the past who have withdrawn have taken some comfort from being the bigger person and realising they could take back control by making that decision to withdraw themselves. Please don't beat yourself up about it - it's an unpleasant and stressful process, and not one you can take lightly.

 

Hopefully you can put it all behind you.

[SweetLorraine]

Thanks for your kind words becky2585,

 

I didn't see it coming at all. Got very drunk that night and awoke the next day to the sight of the notes, books, etc; the darn witness statement waiting to read, highlighted, underlined - all gone thanks to some dumb, clunky sleight of hand in the process, not the hearing, and I made a bad choice as a result.

 

I now realise that all along I have just been standing downwind trying to have a peeing contest against a surfeit of incontinent skunks.

Edited September 20, 2012 by SweetLorraine

[Pusillanimous]

I am really shocked, SweetLorraine. It is really appalling the laxity of the ET. I am sure if that had been the other way round, you would have been ordered by them to produce the documents.

 

I only hope the vultures don't apply for costs becuase of the withdrawal.

[SweetLorraine]

Costs? I can't see that standing up. The Tribunal ignored my requests/warnings and the respondents duly screwed up the bundle process. There is my time and costs to consider as well.