Employment Tribunal Deadline

[steampowered]

Have a read of https://civillitigationbrief.wordpress.com/2015/05/22/taking-the-statement-of-truth-lightly-contempt-of-court-when-documents-were-created-long-after-the-event/ to give yourself an idea as to what is involved.

 

Contempt of court is non-starter. It is not something where you just fill in a form and ask for it to be investigated. The amount of effort required to even get permission to start the process of bringing contempt proceedings is enormous and I doubt you have a spare 100k lying around with which to engage lawyers to achieve that. Bringing contempt of court proceedings is not supposed to be easy.

 

Furthermore, contempt of court proceedings would not be resolved until long after your Employment Tribunal case has finished. It will not help you resolve evidential disputes ahead of your ET interim hearing or trial.

 

I need help in bringing a Contempt of Court charge against him and if he walks free then at least we know it was an honest mistake.

And if you make an unsuccessful contempt application you would be liable for his legal costs, which could easily be tens of thousands of pounds. The usual rule in court litigation is that the loser pays the winner's legal costs (this is not the situation in Employment Tribunals).

 

I would forget about this contempt of court stuff. If someone has put forward demonstrably untrue statements, and you can prove that they knew the statement was untrue (bearing in mind that people misremember the past all the time, it is extremely common for honest people to fool themselves), then your remedy is to go on and win your Employment Tribunal case and ask for costs (which are only awarded in a small number of ET cases) on the basis of the respondent's unreasonable conduct.

[donarebun]

Dear All,

 

Just a short question;

 

When I made the Subject Access Request, I requested for a particular email.

 

The Respondents’ Secretary claimed that she couldn’t find the email but now the email has been found.

 

The Respondents are now claiming that they didn’t need to disclose the email as I didn’t have a right to the email in the first place.

 

Even if (and that’s a big if) I didn’t have right to the email but didn’t they lose their privilege by lying?

 

Your thought please and any case law in support would be appreciated.

 

Please note that I said it is a big if, that means I don’t accept that I didn’t have rights to the email under the DPA1998

 

 

Thanks once again.

[Sidewinder]

Do you now have the email? Does it name you, your position or identify you by any other reasonably common language or inference?

[donarebun]

Let me understand you;

 

are you saying that if (big IF) I don't have rights to see the email under DPA 1998 then their action of lying wouldn't invalidate their privilege of non-disclosure?

 

Please confirm

 

Thanks once again

[becky2585]

There is no privilege of non disclosure. Either the email is relevant or it isn't.

 

It's relevant to a DSAR if you can directly or indirectly be personally identified.

 

It's relevant to tribunal proceedings if it assists or adversely affects either party's case and relates to the issues to be decided.

 

Lying doesn't matter, except perhaps to demonstrate unreasonable behaviour.

[Sidewinder]

The point I was making was that the DPA potentially allows the employer to say that the email wasn't disclosed as it was not held in a 'relevant filing system' - ie which due to it's heading or content was not discovered by means of a search using simple terms, such as name, employee number, position etc. Your allegation that the employer was being untruthful can either be substantiated or rebutted IF the contents of the email in question suggest that it COULD and SHOULD have been disclosed - ie that the relevant content was within the email to allow it to be discovered. That was why I asked whether you actually have a copy of that email now.

 

Evidence is as much about what is NOT said as what IS said, and it is sometimes better to get to the truth using cross-examination. Read up on it. The more that you can show a witness's evidence to be lacking, the greater your chances. A direct accusation of lying will very likely not impress the Judge, but if you can demonstrate that the evidence is untruthful, then the Judge will clearly see that evidence is either incomplete or false. Build the witness up with preliminary questions and then back them into a corner where they cannot disagree with the point that you want to make.

[donarebun]

There is no privilege of non disclosure. Either the email is relevant or it isn't.

 

It's relevant to a DSAR if you can directly or indirectly be personally identified.

 

It's relevant to tribunal proceedings if it assists or adversely affects either party's case and relates to the issues to be decided.

 

Lying doesn't matter, except perhaps to demonstrate unreasonable behaviour.

 

 

Thanks becky2585.

 

Yes I just need to keep proving that they are lying not only to demonstrate unreasonable behaviour but also to attack their credibility.

[donarebun]

The point I was making was that the DPA potentially allows the employer to say that the email wasn't disclosed as it was not held in a 'relevant filing system' - ie which due to it's heading or content was not discovered by means of a search using simple terms, such as name, employee number, position etc. Your allegation that the employer was being untruthful can either be substantiated or rebutted IF the contents of the email in question suggest that it COULD and SHOULD have been disclosed - ie that the relevant content was within the email to allow it to be discovered. That was why I asked whether you actually have a copy of that email now.

 

Evidence is as much about what is NOT said as what IS said, and it is sometimes better to get to the truth using cross-examination. Read up on it. The more that you can show a witness's evidence to be lacking, the greater your chances. A direct accusation of lying will very likely not impress the Judge, but if you can demonstrate that the evidence is untruthful, then the Judge will clearly see that evidence is either incomplete or false. Build the witness up with preliminary questions and then back them into a corner where they cannot disagree with the point that you want to make.

 

 

The email has now been found. which shows clearly they lied earlier.

 

The email was sent to me and others in the team but I didn't respond to it at all.

 

Except the fact that it was sent to me ie my name was in the header section it does not talk about me in the content.

 

I don't know if it means I have no DSAR right to it.

 

I really don't know how to do cross examination and I suspect the Respondents' lawyer will interrupt as much as possible so I wish to get the truth now rather than later.

[donarebun]

Hi Everyone,

 

Please take sometime to understand this as it is very difficult to understand;

 

Basically my line manager claims he had been providing references all this while (I don't believe hence the Tribunal Claim).

 

The other day I applied for a job and the Agency asked him for a reference.

 

He provided only the basic standard one stating start and end date etc.

 

Now to me that is a different treatment

 

Previously he had been providing proper references (if we are to believe him)

 

Now after I have started a claim he is only providing the basic one.

 

That to me is a detriment ie a different treatment.

 

Section 27 of the Equality Act 2010 prohibits such action (it terms it victimization)

 

But the problem is that my case is under the Protected Disclosure Act and I haven't found such prohibition there.

 

I have also noticed that the Protected Disclosure Act and all Acts under the Equality Act tend to be similar and the same treatment is accorded both.

 

No case law exist for Protected Disclosure Act victimisation but can I give it a go?

 

Please your views and also please reread and try and understand what I'm saying.

 

Thanks all

[obiter dictum]

It is up to the employer what reference they give as long as it is factual and fair. They do not even have to supply a reference if they choose not to

Edited May 10, 2016 by obiter dictum

[steampowered]

Now after I have started a claim he is only providing the basic one.

 

That to me is a detriment ie a different treatment.

 

Section 27 of the Equality Act 2010 prohibits such action (it terms it victimization)

 

But the problem is that my case is under the Protected Disclosure Act and I haven't found such prohibition there.

 

I have also noticed that the Protected Disclosure Act and all Acts under the Equality Act tend to be similar and the same treatment is accorded both.

 

No case law exist for Protected Disclosure Act victimisation but can I give it a go?

Hello

 

I believe the legislation you are looking for is s47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18/section/47B)

 

'A worker has the right not to be subjected to any detriment by any act, or any deliberate failure to act, by his employer done on the ground that the worker has made a protected disclosure.'

 

There is precedent case law which applies to your case. See for example http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2006/822.html where one of the allegations made was that a failure to provide a reference amounted to a protected detriment, see paragraph 60 onwards. It was held this is in principle capable of amounting to an actionable 'detriment'.

 

It does not sound like the Equality Act 2010 is relevant, as that Act covers detriment based on a protected characteristic such as age/gender/race etc. and it doesn't sound like that is the case here.

[donarebun]

Hi everyone,

 

Just a quick one ie no long stories

 

Is denial of a goodwill gesture be seen as a detriment?

 

That is something you have no right to but it could have (or maybe should have) been provided to you as a goodwill gesture.

 

Also it probably wasn't even given to anyone else but you asked for it and they should have given it to you as it cost them nothing but you were denied.

 

I'm not talking of references as case law as established that denial of references are detriments.

 

Please any case law would be greatly appreciated.

[steampowered]

Impossible to advise without context - a 'goodwill gesture' could mean anything.

 

In principle, I guess that denial of anything would be a detriment.

 

The difficulty you will have is proving that the denial was a direct result of you making a protected disclosure. There has to be a clear link between the protected disclosure and the detriment you are alleging.

[donarebun]

Hi everyone,

 

I'm a little unclear here;

 

I believe I'm allowed to contact the Tribunal Office to ask them about procedures etc?

 

I also believe it would be wrong for me to contact the Tribunal Office and discuss my case with them?

 

I also believe it would be wrong for me to get an understanding from them?

 

Please your take on this and once again best if you give me one or two case laws

 

Thanks

[steampowered]

You might get help with completing forms and complying with procedures from the Employment Tribunal, but you won't get legal advice about the strength of your case. You'll need to go to a solicitor or somewhere like the CAB for that.

[donarebun]

Hi steampowered,

 

I take it from your statement that it would be wrong for the Tribunal Office to discuss with the Respondent.

 

I also take it that it is wrong for the Respondent to get an "understanding" form the Tribunal Office.

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong

[steampowered]

Hello

 

I'm not sure it would be 'wrong' for the Tribunal Office to discuss the case in strict legal terms, although I imagine the Tribunal Office has some internal guidance against that. The point is more that Tribunal staff are not qualified to provide legal advice (although they can help people comply with procedures, for example by telling them which form to complete).

[donarebun]

Hello everyone,

 

Please I have been ordered to produce a Witness Statement on reasons of Reasonable Practicality" which I have done.

 

Please I wish to post it below and I would love your criticism of it.

 

Like I always say feel free to be brutal as the other side will be brutal.

 

 

Thanks

[donarebun]

PURPOSE OF STATEMENT

 

1. I provide this Witness Statement as ordered by Employment Judge........... on the 3rd of June 2016.

 

2. It is to state the reasons why I didn’t bring a claim within 3 months of each detriment mentioned in my ET1.

 

3. I wish to state that while I have reasonable belief in each statement made by me in this Witness Statement I do not have absolute belief, as the Respondents has withheld vital documents.

 

4. As a result of that I’m unable to sign the Statement of Truth as my religion demands that I have absolute belief in each statement I make.

 

5. I refer you to the Bible scriptures Micah 6:8(NET), Psalm 112:5 (ISV) and Isaiah 56:1(NET).

 

6. I humbly request that the Employment Judge uses his case management powers in ordering the release of these documents.

 

7. This would be most preferable as otherwise it would be either a breach of my right to practice my religion or a case of me suffering detriment as a result of my religion.

 

8. I’m willing to pay for the Respondents’ reasonable cost in releasing all of the requested documents.

 

9. These are postage cost, photocopying cost and time off by various staff in writing the Witness Statements (about 10mins each).

 

DETRIMENT 1: Email from My Line Manager (…....K........)

 

10. I couldn’t have brought a claim within three (3) months of this detriment as it was quite early in my employment and I have a religious obligation to “seek peace with all men” (Rom 12:18) and not run to the Employment Tribunal at first opportunity.

 

11. This position is supported in Chagger v Abbey National 2009 para 92

 

“..….it can be very difficult for an employee to make good his suspicions that he is subject to unlawful victimization discrimination, and he ought not to be criticised for being reluctant or unwilling to devote the time, money and stress necessary to advance that claim

 

12. Bringing a claim of detriment at this stage would have been most unreasonable and a waste of the Employment Tribunal’s time.

 

13. Most importantly it would have been against my religious belief not to give people a second chance and to seek peace at all times.

 

14. I wish to draw your attention to my statement made to the Finance Director (........ M.........) on the 17th of December 2014 (Appendix 1 para 17 highlighted in green)

 

15. Here I quite clearly stated that there were other forms of victimization but I couldn’t prove them.

 

16. Here it would be helpful if the Respondents provide un-redacted (non-redacted) copy of this document so that I can sign the Statement of Truth.

 

DETRIMENT 2: Exclusion from Emails by Other Members of the Construction Team.

 

17. I made several complaint regarding this detriment

 

18. I made attempts to resolve this issue by writing to other members of the construction team on the 17th of November 2014.

 

19. This is the demand placed on me by my religion ie “seek to be at peace with all men” (Rom 12:18)

 

20. Here again it would be most helpful if the Respondents provide un-redacted (non -redacted) copy of email

 

21. When this failed I made a further complaint to the Finance Director (......... M.........) on the 4th of Dec. 2014 (Appendix 2).

 

22. the Finance Director (......... M.........) assured me that he would resolve the issue on the 7th of Dec. 2014 (Appendix 1 para 19 highlighted in pink).

 

23. I had reasonable belief that the Finance Director (......... M.........) spoke to other members of the Construction team hence it would have been most unreasonable for me to make a complaint to the Employment Tribunal at this stage.

 

24. I wish to remind the Tribunal of the EAT decision in (1) Northumberland County Council (2) Governing Body of Choppington First School v D Thompson [2007] where it was ruled that the Tribunal should focus on the reasonability aspect rather than the practicability aspect.

 

25. A Witness Statement from the Finance Director (......... M.........) would prove my point that he said he would speak to other members of the Construction Team.

 

DETRIMENT 3: Bogus Verbal Warning Placed on my File

 

26. On the 12th of November 2014 my Line Manager (.......K..........) made an attempt to issue me a verbal warning for taking appropriate steps to protect others in face of serious and imminent danger.

 

27. ........ S....... the regional Health and Safety Manager for the Respondent warned him that it would be a violation of Section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

 

28. my Line Manager (.......K.........) then proceeded not to issue the warning but still left the inappropriate document on my file (Appendix 3).

 

29. I didn’t know about the Verbal Warning until after I made a Subject Access Request.

 

30. It would have been impossible for me to bring a claim for something I didn’t know about hence it was not reasonable practicable for me to bring a claim then.

 

31. This is a clear case of concealment.

 

32. I brought a claim within three months of when I was aware of it.

 

33. A Witness Statement from the regional Health and Safety Manager (........ S........) would be most helpful at this stage.

 

34. Paragraph 27 is one of the major reasons I cannot sign the Statement of Truth as I have to be absolutely sure of that statement in order to sign it.

 

DETRIMENT 4: Malicious Statement Placed on my File

 

35. my Line Manager (....... K.........) placed malicious statements on my file on the 13th of November 2014 after I had taken appropriate steps to protect others in the face of serious and imminent danger (Appendix 4).

 

36. One of such statement is the claim that I was found sleeping on site on a day I was 50 miles away on a training course.

 

37. In the Respondents’ ET3, my Line Manager (........ K........) claimed he asked me about it and I denied it.

 

38. That is a totally false and misleading statement given to the Tribunal as it was impossible to ask me about it as I was away on that day.

 

39. A Witness Statement from whomever he claims told him will show that my Line Manager (........ K........) fabricated this story hence he didn’t ask me about it.

 

40. I only knew about these false statements after I made a Subject Access Request. This is another case of concealment.

 

41. Once again the Respondents should provide un-redacted (non-redacted) copies of this document so that I can sign the Statement of Truth.

 

DETRIMENT 5: Excluded from my Line Manager (D....... K.........)’s response to the Site Secretary's email.

 

42. I didn’t bring a claim as I had no other clear evidence that my Line Manager (........K........) was victimizing me. I stated this to the Finance Director (A........ M.........) as seen in Appendix 1 para17.

 

43. It would have not been reasonable to bring a claim at this stage as it would have had little prospect of success.

 

44. I wish to remind the Tribunal of the EAT’s position in such situation, please see Wall’s Meat Co. Ltd v Khan and Chagger v Abbey National 2009 para 92

 

DETRIMENT 6: Humiliated in a Bogus Lecture arranged

 

45. I couldn’t reasonably bring a claim at that time as I didn’t know that T............ C......... was a friend of the director of the Subcontracting company.

 

46. Though I got to find out much later but it didn’t have much bite hence I couldn’t bring a claim.

 

47. I wish to remind the Tribunal of the EAT position on this re Chagger v Abbey National 2009 para 92

 

48. The Respondents should produce a list of all its directors and senior management staff who are friends with T....... M........ (The director of the A.......... Limited, the subcontracting firm).

 

49. This would assist the Tribunal in achieving its Overriding Objective of deal with cases fairly and most importantly enable me to sign the Statement of Truth.

 

DETRIMENT 7: Physically Attacked and Threatened

 

50. Here, there was an investigation though a shabby one.

 

51. After the investigation the Finance Director (........ M.........) made several overtures of peace which then placed me under a heavy burden to forgive as a result of my religious background.

 

52. At this stage it would have been unreasonable to put a claim as it would have been against my religious belief as he practically asked for forgiveness.

 

53. He made a statement in para 15 in which he asked “if I was happy to draw a line under this and move on” (Appendix 1 highlighted in yellow).

 

54. Other instances are in para 20 and para 28 where he repeatedly asked if I was happy (Appendix 1 highlighted in orange).

 

55. A most memorable one was the Finance Director (........ M.........) assurance that I would receive training in Astra software.

 

56. At this stage, I wish to state that the Respondents should provide un-redacted (non-redacted) copies of the documents I have made references to.

 

57. Also a Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) confirming if he actually assured me that he would resolve the issue or not and if he made overtures of peace.

 

58. This would assist the Employment Tribunal in achieving it Overriding Objective of dealing with cases fairly.

 

59. And also enable me sign the Statement of Truth in accordance with my religious belief.

 

DETRIMENT 8: Given menial jobs to do

 

60. I was new to the construction industry at that time so I didn’t know that the task given to me was actually a task for the labourers.

 

61. I only started a heavy search for jobs in the construction industry in June, July and August 2015.

 

62. It was then that I discovered that the task was for labourers.

 

63. It would not have been reasonable to bring a claim at that stage due to the knowledge available to me at that time.

 

64. I wish to draw the Tribunal’s attention to Marks & Spencer Plc v Williams-Ryan [2005] para21 where Lord Philips MR said:

 

“It is necessary to consider not merely what the employee knew, but what knowledge the employee should have had had he or she acted reasonably in all the circumstances

 

65. Due to my inexperience in the construction industry I didn’t know that this task was one meant for the Labourers so I couldn’t bring a claim at this stage.

 

DETRIMENT 9: Unfair Dismissal

 

66. The Respondents stated in their Skeleton Argument that I do not intend pursuing this detriment.

 

67. This is a totally false statement as I intend pursing this detriment to the full.

 

68. My religion demands that I deal fairly and have absolute belief before making any statement (claim). Reference to Psalm 112:5

 

69. I believe that the true reason my dismissal was approved (agreed) by the Directors was as a result of the many false statements made by my Line Manager (.......... K...........).

 

70. The most relevant was the Personnel Review File in which he made a lot of false statements.

 

71. Until I have evidence I cannot pursue this claim.

 

72. A Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) and the Construction Director (........... E.........) will reveal the true reason for my dismissal.

 

73. Also the Management Report sent by the Finance Director (........ M.........) will also provide the relevant evidence.

 

74. I humbly request that a Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) is released by the Respondents.

 

75. It is for the benefit of the Respondents as the claim of Unfair Dismissal will be dealt with now and put to rest once and for all.

 

76. Please note the following Case Laws: Machine Tool Industry Research Association v. Simpson [1988] ICR 558, Marley Machines (UK) Limited v. Anderson [1996] ICR 78, Cambridge & Peterborough Foundation NHS Trust v Crouch [EAT 0108/09], and Teva (UK) Limited v Heslip UKEAT/0008/09.

 

77. These has shown that extension of time limit applies when there is ignorance of material facts.

 

78. I also request that the Management Report and Notes made by the Finance Director (........ M.........) regarding my dismissal be made available immediately.

 

79. These ought to have be released as part of my Subject Access Request.

 

80. As discovered by the Employment Judge during the Hearing of 3rd of June 2016, no Letter of Termination of Employment was ever sent to me.

 

81. Also no procedure (ACAS or contractual) was followed in dismissing me.

 

82. A Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) would reveal this fact.

 

83. Once again the Respondents should release this and other Witness statement as this would assist the Tribunal in achieving its Overriding Objective of dealing with cases fairly.

 

84. Also it would enable me sign the Statement of Truth in accordance with my religious belief.

 

DETRIMENT 10: Failure to provide references

 

85. I only knew about this after I made a Subject Access Request.

 

86. Failure to get a particular job could be for a lot of reason it is only after I had so many failures that I became suspicious and made a Subject Access Request.

 

87. As soon as I became aware of this I put in a claim immediately.

 

DETRIMENT 11: Malicious Statement place on my Personnel Review File.

 

88. I didn’t know about this document until after I made a Subject Access Request

 

89. This document was sent to the Finance Director (........ M.........) and the Construction Director (........ E.......)

 

90. A Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) who conducted my dismissal would reveal that he never made mention of this document nor the content of the document.

 

91. There was a deliberate attempt of concealment and deception as to the true reason of my dismissal.

 

DETRIMENT 12: Persistent Refusal to release Personal Data

 

92. This detriment is in time but I would point out a few things now;

 

93. I made a particular request for an email titled “Labourers” sent out on the 13th of November 2014 by the Site Secretary.

 

94. Rather than ascertain their rights (which is denied) the Respondents via the Site Secretary tried to mislead me in claiming that the email was not found.

 

95. There was a persistent attempt at concealment and deception by the Site Secretary hence the Respondents.

 

96. A Forensic Search by a Reputable Company will reveal the present state of the email ie if and when it was deleted.

 

97. I humbly request that the Respondents provide such

 

98. Also a Witness Statement from the Site Secretary would reveal the true reason why she actively tried to mislead the Respondents’ solicitor and in turn the Tribunal.

 

99. Unfortunately, I wouldn’t pay for the cost of this Witness Statement, nor Forensic Search, as the Site Secretary exhibited unreasonable behavior.

 

100. Also as a result of my Subject Access Request the Respondents were meant to provide Witness Statements taken as a result of the incident of the 4th of December 2014.

 

101. Rather than fulfilling their legal obligation the Respondents via their solicitor (…………. W…….) falsely claim that the identities of the witnesses are unknown.

 

102. This is a completely false statement and the solicitor (………W…….) knowingly made them.

 

103. Also he claims that the statements were given with the assurance of confidentiality

 

104. Again this is a false statement as all Witness Statements given in disciplinary issues do not enjoy confidentially at all (Principle of Natural Justice).

 

105. The Solicitor (………..W…….) falsely made those statement in order to conceal the detriments suffered after I took appropriate steps to protect others in the face of serious and imminent danger.

 

CONCLUSION

 

106. Though I knew of some of the detriments suffered after I made a Protected Disclosure and took appropriate steps to protect others in the face of serious and imminent danger

 

107. I didn’t have a strong case and this is confirmed in my statement to the Finance Director (…….M….) on the 17th of December 2014 (Appendix 1 para 17 highlighted in green).

 

108. Chagger v Abbey National 2009 para 92 is very clear on that fact and states that I shouldn’t be criticized at all.

 

109. When several attempts at getting a permanent job failed I became suspicious and made a Subject Access Request.

 

110. Only then did I have the required proof and evidence of detriments suffered.

 

111. The Respondents have made various and persistent attempts at concealment and deception.

 

112. Several Case Law as noted earlier clearly applies. This is an issue already dealt with in Law.

 

113. As discovered by Employment Judge H......., the Respondents failed to provide a written reason for my dismissal.

 

114. This clearly shows persistent attempts at cover ups and deception.

 

115. Finally, I wish to remind the Tribunal of the conclusion made by the Court of Appeal in Marley Machines (UK) Limited v. Anderson [1996] ICR 78;

 

“If employers want to protect themselves from late claims presented on the basis of newly discovered information they should ensure that the fullest information is made available to the employee at the time of dismissal”

 

116. Since the Respondents has chosen to conceal the reasons for my dismissal they have no right to raise issues of jurisdiction.

[steampowered]

What is the purpose of this witness statement - is it to explain why you were unable to issue your claim within the three month deadline?

 

If so, you only appear to address that in paragraphs 1-9. The other 100 or so paragraphs seems to be a laundry list of complaints.

 

Paragraphs 1-9 seem to say that you couldn't file your claim within the three months because you are a Christian. That sounds like a pretty hopeless argument to me. You are going to have to do a much better job of explaining why you couldn't issue your claim within the three moth time limit.

[donarebun]

Hi Steampowered,

 

Thanks for your quick response,

 

Paragraph 1-9 just explains why I didn't sign the Statement of Truth.

 

It doesn't state why I didn't issue my claim.

 

I can't sign the Statement of Truth yet until I get some documents from the other side.

 

Does this clarifies it.

 

Once again thanks for your quick response

[donarebun]

PURPOSE OF STATEMENT

 

1. I provide this Witness Statement as ordered by Employment Judge........... on the 3rd of June 2016.

 

2. It is to state the reasons why I didn’t bring a claim within 3 months of each detriment mentioned in my ET1.

 

DETRIMENT 1: Email from My Line Manager (…....K........)

 

3. I couldn’t have brought a claim within three (3) months of this detriment as it was quite early in my employment and I have a religious obligation to “seek peace with all men” (Rom 12:18) and not run to the Employment Tribunal at first opportunity.

 

4. This position is supported in Chagger v Abbey National 2009 para 92

 

“..….it can be very difficult for an employee to make good his suspicions that he is subject to unlawful victimization discrimination, and he ought not to be criticised for being reluctant or unwilling to devote the time, money and stress necessary to advance that claim

 

5. Bringing a claim of detriment at this stage would have been most unreasonable and a waste of the Employment Tribunal’s time.

 

6. Most importantly it would have been against my religious belief not to give people a second chance and to seek peace at all times.

 

7. I wish to draw your attention to my statement made to the Finance Director (........ M.........) on the 17th of December 2014 (Appendix 1 para 17 highlighted in green)

 

8. Here I quite clearly stated that there were other forms of victimization but I couldn’t prove them.

 

9. Here it would be helpful if the Respondents provide un-redacted (non-redacted) copy of this document so that I can sign the Statement of Truth.

 

DETRIMENT 2: Exclusion from Emails by Other Members of the Construction Team.

 

10. I made several complaint regarding this detriment

 

11. I made attempts to resolve this issue by writing to other members of the construction team on the 17th of November 2014.

 

12. This is the demand placed on me by my religion ie “seek to be at peace with all men” (Rom 12:18)

 

13. Here again it would be most helpful if the Respondents provide un-redacted (non -redacted) copy of email

 

14. When this failed I made a further complaint to the Finance Director (......... M.........) on the 4th of Dec. 2014 (Appendix 2).

 

15. the Finance Director (......... M.........) assured me that he would resolve the issue on the 7th of Dec. 2014 (Appendix 1 para 19 highlighted in pink).

 

16. I had reasonable belief that the Finance Director (......... M.........) spoke to other members of the Construction team hence it would have been most unreasonable for me to make a complaint to the Employment Tribunal at this stage.

 

17. I wish to remind the Tribunal of the EAT decision in (1) Northumberland County Council (2) Governing Body of Choppington First School v D Thompson [2007] where it was ruled that the Tribunal should focus on the reasonability aspect rather than the practicability aspect.

 

18. A Witness Statement from the Finance Director (......... M.........) would prove my point that he said he would speak to other members of the Construction Team.

 

DETRIMENT 3: Bogus Verbal Warning Placed on my File

 

19. On the 12th of November 2014 my Line Manager (.......K..........) made an attempt to issue me a verbal warning for taking appropriate steps to protect others in face of serious and imminent danger.

 

20. ........ S....... the regional Health and Safety Manager for the Respondent warned him that it would be a violation of Section 44 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

 

21. my Line Manager (.......K.........) then proceeded not to issue the warning but still left the inappropriate document on my file (Appendix 3).

 

22. I didn’t know about the Verbal Warning until after I made a Subject Access Request.

 

23. It would have been impossible for me to bring a claim for something I didn’t know about hence it was not reasonable practicable for me to bring a claim then.

 

24. This is a clear case of concealment.

 

25. I brought a claim within three months of when I was aware of it.

 

26. A Witness Statement from the regional Health and Safety Manager (........ S........) would be most helpful at this stage.

 

27. Paragraph 27 is one of the major reasons I cannot sign the Statement of Truth as I have to be absolutely sure of that statement in order to sign it.

 

DETRIMENT 4: Malicious Statement Placed on my File

 

28. my Line Manager (D....... K.........) placed malicious statements on my file on the 13th of November 2014 after I had taken appropriate steps to protect others in the face of serious and imminent danger (Appendix 4).

 

29. One of such statement is the claim that I was found sleeping on site on a day I was 50 miles away on a training course.

 

30. In the Respondents’ ET3, my Line Manager (D........ K........) claimed he asked me about it and I denied it.

 

31. That is a totally false and misleading statement given to the Tribunal as it was impossible to ask me about it as I was away on that day.

 

32. A Witness Statement from whomever he claims told him will show that my Line Manager (........ K........) fabricated this story hence he didn’t ask me about it.

 

33. I only knew about these false statements after I made a Subject Access Request. This is another case of concealment.

 

34. Once again the Respondents should provide un-redacted (non-redacted) copies of this document so that I can sign the Statement of Truth.

 

DETRIMENT 5: Excluded from my Line Manager (....... K.........)’s response to the Site Secretary's email.

 

35. I didn’t bring a claim as I had no other clear evidence that my Line Manager (........K........) was victimizing me. I stated this to the Finance Director (........ M.........) as seen in Appendix 1 para17.

 

36. It would have not been reasonable to bring a claim at this stage as it would have had little prospect of success.

 

37. I wish to remind the Tribunal of the EAT’s position in such situation, please see Wall’s Meat Co. Ltd v Khan and Chagger v Abbey National 2009 para 92

 

DETRIMENT 6: Humiliated in a Bogus Lecture arranged

 

38. I couldn’t reasonably bring a claim at that time as I didn’t know that T............ C......... was a friend of the director of the Subcontracting company.

 

39. Though I got to find out much later but it didn’t have much bite hence I couldn’t bring a claim.

 

40. I wish to remind the Tribunal of the EAT position on this re Chagger v Abbey National 2009 para 92

 

41. The Respondents should produce a list of all its directors and senior management staff who are friends with T....... M........ (The director of the A.......... Limited, the subcontracting firm).

 

42. This would assist the Tribunal in achieving its Overriding Objective of deal with cases fairly and most importantly enable me to sign the Statement of Truth.

 

DETRIMENT 7: Physically Attacked and Threatened

 

43. Here, there was an investigation though a shabby one.

 

44. After the investigation the Finance Director (........ M.........) made several overtures of peace which then placed me under a heavy burden to forgive as a result of my religious background.

 

45. At this stage it would have been unreasonable to put a claim as it would have been against my religious belief as he practically asked for forgiveness.

 

46. He made a statement in para 15 in which he asked “if I was happy to draw a line under this and move on” (Appendix 1 highlighted in yellow).

 

47. Other instances are in para 20 and para 28 where he repeatedly asked if I was happy (Appendix 1 highlighted in orange).

 

48. A most memorable one was the Finance Director (........ M.........) assurance that I would receive training in Astra software.

 

49. At this stage, I wish to state that the Respondents should provide un-redacted (non-redacted) copies of the documents I have made references to.

 

50. Also a Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) confirming if he actually assured me that he would resolve the issue or not and if he made overtures of peace.

 

51. This would assist the Employment Tribunal in achieving it Overriding Objective of dealing with cases fairly.

 

52. And also enable me sign the Statement of Truth in accordance with my religious belief.

 

DETRIMENT 8: Given menial jobs to do

 

53. I was new to the construction industry at that time so I didn’t know that the task given to me was actually a task for the labourers.

 

54. I only started a heavy search for jobs in the construction industry in June, July and August 2015.

 

55. It was then that I discovered that the task was for labourers.

 

56. It would not have been reasonable to bring a claim at that stage due to the knowledge available to me at that time.

 

57. I wish to draw the Tribunal’s attention to Marks & Spencer Plc v Williams-Ryan [2005] para21 where Lord Philips MR said:

 

58. “It is necessary to consider not merely what the employee knew, but what knowledge the employee should have had had he or she acted reasonably in all the circumstances

 

59. Due to my inexperience in the construction industry I didn’t know that this task was one meant for the Labourers so I couldn’t bring a claim at this stage.

 

DETRIMENT 9: Unfair Dismissal

 

60. The Respondents stated in their Skeleton Argument that I do not intend pursuing this detriment.

 

61. This is a totally false statement as I intend pursing this detriment to the full.

 

62. My religion demands that I deal fairly and have absolute belief before making any statement (claim). Reference to Psalm 112:5

 

63. I believe that the true reason my dismissal was approved (agreed) by the Directors was as a result of the many false statements made by my Line Manager (.......... K...........).

 

64. The most relevant was the Personnel Review File in which he made a lot of false statements.

 

65. Until I have evidence I cannot pursue this claim.

 

66. A Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) and the Construction Director (........... E.........) will reveal the true reason for my dismissal.

 

67. Also the Management Report sent by the Finance Director (........ M.........) will also provide the relevant evidence.

 

68. I humbly request that a Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) is released by the Respondents.

 

69. It is for the benefit of the Respondents as the claim of Unfair Dismissal will be dealt with now and put to rest once and for all.

 

70. Please note the following Case Laws: Machine Tool Industry Research Association v. Simpson [1988] ICR 558, Marley Machines (UK) Limited v. Anderson [1996] ICR 78, Cambridge & Peterborough Foundation NHS Trust v Crouch [EAT 0108/09], and Teva (UK) Limited v Heslip UKEAT/0008/09.

 

71. These has shown that extension of time limit applies when there is ignorance of material facts.

 

72. I also request that the Management Report and Notes made by the Finance Director (........ M.........) regarding my dismissal be made available immediately.

 

73. These ought to have be released as part of my Subject Access Request.

 

74. As discovered by the Employment Judge during the Hearing of 3rd of June 2016, no Letter of Termination of Employment was ever sent to me.

 

75. Also no procedure (ACAS or contractual) was followed in dismissing me.

 

76. A Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) would reveal this fact.

 

77. Once again the Respondents should release this and other Witness statement as this would assist the Tribunal in achieving its Overriding Objective of dealing with cases fairly.

 

78. Also it would enable me sign the Statement of Truth in accordance with my religious belief.

 

DETRIMENT 10: Failure to provide references

 

79. I only knew about this after I made a Subject Access Request.

 

80. Failure to get a particular job could be for a lot of reason it is only after I had so many failures that I became suspicious and made a Subject Access Request.

 

81. As soon as I became aware of this I put in a claim immediately.

 

DETRIMENT 11: Malicious Statement place on my Personnel Review File.

 

82. I didn’t know about this document until after I made a Subject Access Request

 

83. This document was sent to the Finance Director (........ M.........) and the Construction Director (........ E.......)

 

84. A Witness Statement from the Finance Director (........ M.........) who conducted my dismissal would reveal that he never made mention of this document nor the content of the document.

 

85. There was a deliberate attempt of concealment and deception as to the true reason of my dismissal.

 

DETRIMENT 12: Persistent Refusal to release Personal Data

 

86. This detriment is in time but I would point out a few things now;

 

87. I made a particular request for an email titled “Labourers” sent out on the 13th of November 2014 by the Site Secretary.

 

88. Rather than ascertain their rights (which is denied) the Respondents via the Site Secretary tried to mislead me in claiming that the email was not found.

 

89. There was a persistent attempt at concealment and deception by the Site Secretary hence the Respondents.

 

90. A Forensic Search by a Reputable Company will reveal the present state of the email ie if and when it was deleted.

 

91. I humbly request that the Respondents provide such

 

92. Also a Witness Statement from the Site Secretary would reveal the true reason why she actively tried to mislead the Respondents’ solicitor and in turn the Tribunal.

 

93. Unfortunately, I wouldn’t pay for the cost of this Witness Statement, nor Forensic Search, as the Site Secretary exhibited unreasonable behavior.

 

94. Also as a result of my Subject Access Request the Respondents were meant to provide Witness Statements taken as a result of the incident of the 4th of December 2014.

 

95. Rather than fulfilling their legal obligation the Respondents via their solicitor (…………. W…….) falsely claim that the identities of the witnesses are unknown.

 

96. This is a completely false statement and the solicitor (………W…….) knowingly made them.

 

97. Also he claims that the statements were given with the assurance of confidentiality

 

98. Again this is a false statement as all Witness Statements given in disciplinary issues do not enjoy confidentially at all (Principle of Natural Justice).

 

99. The Solicitor (………..W…….) falsely made those statement in order to conceal the detriments suffered after I took appropriate steps to protect others in the face of serious and imminent danger.

 

CONCLUSION

 

100. Though I knew of some of the detriments suffered after I made a Protected Disclosure and took appropriate steps to protect others in the face of serious and imminent danger

 

101. I didn’t have a strong case and this is confirmed in my statement to the Finance Director (…….M….) on the 17th of December 2014 (Appendix 1 para 17 highlighted in green).

 

102. Chagger v Abbey National 2009 para 92 is very clear on that fact and states that I shouldn’t be criticized at all.

 

103. When several attempts at getting a permanent job failed I became suspicious and made a Subject Access Request.

 

104. Only then did I have the required proof and evidence of detriments suffered.

 

105. The Respondents have made various and persistent attempts at concealment and deception.

 

106. Several Case Law as noted earlier clearly applies. This is an issue already dealt with in Law.

 

107. As discovered by Employment Judge H......., the Respondents failed to provide a written reason for my dismissal.

 

108. This clearly shows persistent attempts at cover ups and deception.

 

109. Finally, I wish to remind the Tribunal of the conclusion made by the Court of Appeal in Marley Machines (UK) Limited v. Anderson [1996] ICR 78;

 

“If employers want to protect themselves from late claims presented on the basis of newly discovered information they should ensure that the fullest information is made available to the employee at the time of dismissal”

 

110. Since the Respondents has chosen to conceal the reasons for my dismissal they have no right to raise issues of jurisdiction.

[donarebun]

Hi,

 

I have edited it and is it clearer?

[becky2585]

You need to remove all of the religious references as it has nothing at all to do with your case.

 

Your witness statement "statement of truth" is "I confirm that the content of this statement is true to the best of my own knowledge and belief", not "everything I say here is completely and indisputably true". You need to sign that and not come up with reasons why you can't.

 

You need to focus on why you were unable to present your claim within three months. From what I've read I don't see much hope for you though I'm afraid.

 

Just to add (edited) - your statement is a combination between facts for the final hearing and an application for disclosure - neither of which are relevant. List the dates and acts, explain why they should be joined together, and explain why you couldn't bring the claim within time and why you brought it within such a further reasonable period of time following the deadline.

[Sidewinder]

Have to agree - all references to religious belief need to be scratched. The Judge will certainly do that and may even not get to read any of the stuff below as it almost appears that you are introducing a religious discrimination element