Employment Tribunal Appeal

[wildm]

I have had my bundle to the EAT returned as they say it is not correct.

 

I followed their rules implicitly when compiling it as they stated in a letter exactly what should be in there. I wrote back asking what it is that they would like removed but they just state that I need to have it agreed with the respondent. The respondent has already told me they want their GOR in there (more paper) though the EAT did not say it should be in there. I have absolutely no idea what is wrong with my bundle as everything the EAT said to include I did.

 

The EAT letter states that I must get the respondents agreement to the bundle which I find rather odd as the ET bundle was never agreed with me. The EAT also state that the bundle is over 100 pages which it is but what do I take out if what is in there is what they asked me to put in there?

So my questions are

Why does the bundle have to be agreed when they did not ask me to agree the ET bundle?

What do I remove if everything there is in accordance with their directions and their letter?

[becky2585]

You actually do have to agree a Bundle, both at ET and EAT level. If you or the Respondent neglected to do this, that could technically have been a breach of the Order. Sometimes the ET remains silent on the point, but it's logical that if two parties have separate documents, they would have to speak at some point to agree what is and what isn't being included.

 

Its impossible to say what should be removed without knowing any of the details of the case, but I would suggest either looking to the Respondent's representative for guidance, or seeking legal advice of your own.

 

What you generally need to include in the EAT Bundle is the Judgment which is being appealed plus the written reasons, the notice of appeal, the Respondent's Answer to the Appeal, the ET1 and ET3 (along with Particulars of Claim and Grounds of Resistance), and relevant orders and any documents agreed with the other side or ordered by the EAT.

 

The bundle cannot exceed 100 pages unless you seek permission from the EAT to do so.

[wildm]

Many thanks for your response. The ET bundle arrived very late and was never agreed as it omitted many items that did not suit their case including a GP letter noted in the GP records but later apparently "lost". This is of course disputed by the respondents solicitors though there are emails surrounding the time and nothing asking for agreement and the GP notes clearly state where the GP letter was sent and when.

 

I found to my cost that the ET remained silent on many matters and far too often in my opinion hence the appeal but I will not bore you with the details suffice to say I have no faith in the ET system.

 

The EAT do appear to stick to the rules, however, that is no consolation to me because if the ET had I would have no need of the EAT at all.

 

I have applied for an extension to the 100 pages which "they" will no doubt object to and have just had another snooty letter telling me they would pursue for the costs etc. I am totally fed up with their bullying. It was a bullying case that was lost at ET as they had a solicitor and barrister and the bullying continues with their £1000k a day barrister now over 4 years' later. There is no justice in England unless you are rich and that is the fact of the matter.