Witness Intimidation plus Ex Employer Lying

[becky2585]

Is it a final hearing next week? If so, their chance to see your records has long passed!

 

You need to obtain the police incident numbers and any records the police will allow you access to ASAP to show the intimidation. The tribunal will take a very dim view of that!

[becky2585]

Just make sure that you provide a copy of anything you intend to present at the hearing to the other side beforehand (and as soon as possible) or you won't be able to rely on it.

[becky2585]

Well you're doing everything right, which will reflect well on you!

 

Is it a solicitor acting for the respondent, or one of these consultancy type places? Their representation sounds poor and borderline abusing process...

[becky2585]

A different judge for a final hearing?

 

Was the first day listed as a PHR or something? If not, it'll be the same judge!

 

Good luck today!

[becky2585]

It's up to the Respondent to call witnesses in whichever order they please, so unfortunately you will just have to wait and see who they want to go first.

 

Being "ripped apart" is all part of cross examination. Don't forget you also get your turn to retaliate!

[becky2585]

You need to couch it as a question.

 

Usually, but it depends on the judge some judges might show sympathy! I went to a tribunal recently where my client essentially ended up in a semi emotional conversation with the unrepresented respondent who was supposed to be cross examining him!

 

Other judges wouldn't tolerate any deviation from procedure, though. It's a judgment call.

[becky2585]

Sorry to hear of your problems. The tibunal is limited in what it can decide upon and you will have to use other legal menas to address all the other points. If your ex-employer is prosecuted successfully then the gates will be wide open for you to sue them for defamation and recover monies for your lost business. i hope that the police take all the other matters seriously and that any charges reflect the full range of your complaints.

As for their solicitors, they take the money and dont have to take the consquences. They will always claim that they only do what they are told to do by their client. Utter tosh but in legal circles it is accepted as being true otherwise 50% of lawyers would be gaoled in every case heard.

 

Actually a Solicitors primary duty is to the Court, not the client, so what you're saying is not accurate. A solicitor legally has to stop acting for a client if they are asked to mislead the Court.

 

And think about it - if there are solicitors on both sides, logic dictates that one of them has to lose so the win rate for any lawyer could easily be 50%...

[becky2585]

During my cross examination of me, all the respondents plus their 'witnesses' have been present.

 

Am I allowed to ask that when I start to question each of the respondents and 'witnesses' am I allowed to ask that prior to questioning, that those I am not questioning are outside of the room. I ask this because they have made up their statements and I believe, if they do not hear each other's answers to my questions, I can prove that they fabricated their statements and evidence.

 

C

 

I don't think so, no. It's a public hearing, so anyone can be present.

[becky2585]

Unless they were disabled and couldn't physically get there, it's unlikely such a request would be granted, I believe.

[becky2585]

They're in another country, back where they live, over 12 hours flying time.

 

If necessary, they will fly over here to give evidence, but, obviously expensive and I will have to find the money somehow.

 

I read that if someone far away abroad, so not just over the channel, then it can be considered. But I can't find enough information on this.

 

Arguably that's another good reason.

 

Ill see if I can find anything for you.

[becky2585]

Having had a brief look, it appears as though its only been permitted and published once, in the Reading ET in 2012. That was also for a witness who was abroad. Unfortunately it's an unreported case, so can't be used as a precedent. The other problem is that the Tribunal did not have wi fi (and many don't in my experience). So they had to hire a local hotel to conduct the hearing.

 

Anyway the ET rules should help you here. Rule 15 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 provides that “A hearing may be conducted (in whole or in part) by use of electronic communications provided that the Employment Judge or Tribunal conducting the hearing considers it just and equitable to do so”.

 

I can't find anything else, unfortunately,

[becky2585]

Is this an adjournment of a final hearing?

 

Were you released from oath?

[becky2585]

You need to be careful. If you're still in oath you shouldn't discuss your case at all, with anyone!

 

I would make every effort to attend. The case may well be struck out if there are persistent adjournments on medical grounds which makes it impossible to have a fair hearing or which prejudices the respondent.

 

Can you do anything to alleviate your symptoms in the meantime? Is there a walk in NHS centre near you where you can receive medical assistance tonight to help you finish the hearing?

[becky2585]

Calamity you may struggle to find a good solicitor who can read all the documents and draft an appeal all in one day, so be careful.

 

Depending on where you are in the country, trainees are usually from about £100 plus VAT per hour. More senior lawyers will be up to £250 plus VAT, although central London goes up to about the £400 plus VAT mark for the more senior types!

 

The Law Society website is a starting point for you.