Forcing a Defendant (Local Authority) to name an employee (to be called as a witness)

[pastie321]

I have a small claim I have brought against my Local Authority and wish to call one of their employees as a witness regarding what took place at a property inspection.

I submitted a Subject Access Request with the LA but this has been redacted.

Is there a court process I can follow to force the LA, as the Defendant, to name their employee so they can be called as a witness under CPR 34?

I was thinking an appeal to the ICO to remove some of the redaction may be a possible route, but this will likely take a considerable time.

As things stand, the LA has lied in their witness statement about the events that took place at the property inspection, so I want to put the employee in front of the court to see if they are happy to lie to the judge!

[Pezza54]

If the judge has any doubt about the validity of the defendant's witness statement then he or she may decide to summons the individual inspector/surveyor.
Witnesses in the small claims track are not under oath so they may not hesitate to be untruthful. Hopefully you have some documentary evidence filed with the court that proves their witness statement is not completely true

[12tribes]

The LA will not give staff names generally - even if they deal with the public. And the ICO will back them up. Only if the staff member voluntary provides it can u receive a name [Orwellian!]. There is another way though - since LA's do have to list all of their employees along with job titles; ask them for the website page.

[12tribes]

I wouldnt have thought you could make someone come to court or respond, even with the name

[atticus]

I wouldnt have thought you could make someone come to court or respond, even with the name

That is not correct. CPR 34.2 sets out the procedure for issuing a witness summons. Obviously the person summoned would have to be named.

[12tribes]

That is not correct. CPR 34.2 sets out the procedure for issuing a witness summons. Obviously the person summoned would have to be named.

I meant by personally requesting [an unknown] council employee to come to court - you would have to get CPR 34 2 / summons signed b a judge, otherwise a complainant could demand any person comes to court; it would have to be backed by the judge? No doubt the judge can also legally demand the the name of the employee comes into the public domain at the same time. Otherwise, LA's - from my recent exp. - wont go against an employee's choice for privacy - ie name / ID can be withheld. ICO wont intervene.

I had two employees / civil servants refusing to give ID / names by email and phone [instead they use 'Customer Service Team'] and the ICO green-lights this if you appeal.
To me this fosters mistrust and makes such people almost unaccountable. If you have heard of 'Woke' its all linked to that progressive ideology. Should you make a criticism in frustration at this, you card is marked with making 'micro aggression's'.

[atticus]

If that is what you meant you did not express yourself clearly. You gave a misleading impression.

[Manxman]

The LA will not give staff names generally - even if they deal with the public. And the ICO will back them up. Only if the staff member voluntary provides it can u receive a name [Orwellian!]. There is another way though - since LA's do have to list all of their employees along with job titles; ask them for the website page.

Really? Do you have an authority for that proposition?

(I ask because it would be very useful to know... )