Statement of truth in defence/application

[ecalid]

Thanks Ula

Sorry, Yes basically my claim is for automatically unfair dismissal and constructive dismissal.

The respondent had applied to the court to strike out my claim on the grounds that my claim stands no reasonable prospect of success.

The court has denied the application on the grounds of fact finding.

Everything has been going smoothly until I put a spanner in the works and did not disclose the full conversation.

Luckily, the conversation that I have disclosed has not been disclosed by the respondent and I have genuine reason to believe that the respondent is withholding this information to bolster their arguments set out in their defence.

The context behind the conversations being used by the respondent is ambiguous as they have deliberately scaled up or down particular conversations in the screen as to omit the context.

Also the witness who has supplied this evidence, was a good friend, we had a very strong professional relationship that has now been tarnished by the actions of the respondent. I have reason to believe that he would be given privileges in exchange for our conversations on facebook.

The respondent, particularly in their defence has deliberately avoided particular events that would cause damage to their defence.

They had embellished the hell out of their defence in order tordip the balance of probability in hopes of being awarded a quick strike out. Now the respondent has gone on the defensive and is trying to trip me up.

For example the respondent wanted to delay the compiling of the evidence bundle as they were absolutally confident that a strike would be awarded.

I sent the documents nonetheless as per the CMO.

I am thinking that the best option would be to rely on the documents I have disclosed that clearly show that the respondent has prejudiced their own evidence by withholding.

What are your thoughts?

Thank you so much by the way, you have been so helpfull!!

[ecalid]

The email was sent on monday.

[ULA]

Thank you for the wider detail which now added your original few posts is helpful.

For what it is worth the respondent should have complied with the CMO even if they were trying to get part of the claim struck because if they did not succeed, as has happened in this case, they still needed to meet the timescales.

Well done to you for ensuring that you are within the timescales for complying with the CMO.

When is the indexed and paginated bundle due to be sent to you by the respondent? If it is still to be done and

you did actually send the full document as indicated by the end of play Tues then hopefully it should appear in the bundle.

If it is not in the bundle then that may be the time to apply to the Tribunal to request that it be included, given that you have the evidence of the email you send on Monday and the email with the document on Tues. If the bundle has already been produced then the process is the same you will need to apply to the Tribunal

If you believe, from what you have already provided that the respondent has prejudiced their own evidence that is good, but I always believe in "belt and braces" so if this document adds weight to that evidence and it is not included then I would just say at least consider making the application. There is also no guarantee the Tribunal will support the application, so then you will be back to relying on what you already have.

Hope that makes sense.

[ecalid]

Thanks Ula

So far I haven't sent the PDFs in as the respondent has not replied to my emails.

They are still due to prepare the bundle.

Thank you that makes perfect sense.

Could I raise the respondents conduct into my witness statement?

[ecalid]

Hello again Ula

Sorry to bother you!. But the respondent has asked me not to send the witness statement tomorrow as we can't agree on the disclosure of documents.

Whats happening?!, I'm so confused!

Please help

Thanks in advance

[ULA]

My view would be that if the exchange of witness statements it due tomorrow in accordance with the CMO then they should be exchanged. The deadlines in the CMO are pretty strict unless there has been an agreed extension by the Tribunal.

It may though just be worth checking with the Tribunal by giving them a call in the morning. Which will then still give you time to email your witness statement over.

[ecalid]

Ok Thank you! Ula

Is there any particular reason that a firm of solicitors should be encouraging me to breach the courts orders?

[ecalid]

Ok Ula so here's the story so far!

Sorry for pestering you all the time on this, nobody else has seemed to chime in and I am unable to afford legal representation.

Basicly...

Me and the respondent has gone back and forth in regards to the full disclosure of the conversations over Facebook. The respondent in an email has indicated to me that the client has exhausted their disclosure obligations and as such, it is down to the employee to have disclosed the full conversation to the client and as such, an application to force disclosure would be unhelpful.

On this basis I then decided to proceed with the documents that had already been disclosed, particularly to ensure that the CMO was adhered to.

The respondent was adamant that I should send them the full conversation and delay the swapping of witness statements until late September. I repeatedly asked the respondent to go through the courts as I did not believe we had any jurisdiction to amend the courts deadlines.

I also pointed out with respect, that I am sure that the respondent would not have lacked the foresight to produce a witness statement based on the evidence already disclosed and additionally do not see any reason to delay the witness statements.

I contacted the courts by phone and asked if the respondent had applied to delay the witness statements and they had confirmed that they did not. I mentioned that the respondent did not want me to provide my witness statement as set out by the CMO and the nice lady on the phone said that if the respondent wants to "Break the rules" then let them do it, but I am obliged to follow the CMO.

After reminding the respondent yesterday morning (Friday) that they are obliged to include me into any correspondence when applying for anything from the court, within 10 minutes they applied to the court to delay the witness statements on the grounds that I had previously indicated that there is much more evidence to be disclosed and I then changed my mind. Within the overriding objective the respondent thinks It would be best to put all evidence forward before the tribunal.

They have indicated to the tribunal that I would not give my consent in delaying the witness statements and as such have applied the court on the day they should have been exchanged.

I then received further correspondence from the respondent indicating that I should not send my witness statement and out of professional conduct they would not open or read any witness statement that I sent. They also went on to conclude that they would not be in the office and they will pick up next week.

I immediately sent my witness statement and then replied to the email that I was attached in by the respondent in their application. I have included in this email the proof that my witness statement was delivered by email by the courts deadline and I also posted a screenshot from google indicating the opening hours of the respondents representatives. I have concluded that the respondent will have received the witness statement.

I have complained to the court of the respondents conduct and have provided screenshots of the emails sent to me by the respondent indicating that I should not under any circumstances send them the witness statement.

I also conveyed in my email that the respondent is a professional representative and I would have reasonably expected them to have applied to the court when it was reasonably practicable and not on the day that the statements should have been swapped.

I have not received the respondents witness statement. It is now 1 day after the statements should have been swapped.

I put in my email that should the court see that the best court of action would be to allow full disclosure of the facebook conversation, then I would be happy to supply it now that the respondent has gone through the proper channels.

Please let me know your thoughts on this.

Thanks in advance.

[ULA]

Sorry just need to unravel your terminology. The Respondent - do you see that as your employer or their legal representative and if the latter do you see the client then as the employer or is there another "client" to your employer involved in the issue. I believe not but just want to check.

As the lady from the Tribunal stated the CMO and the deadlines contained within them unless approved for extension by the Tribunal are "cast in stone" and must be adhered to. Therefore without any confirmation of an extension to the exchange of witness statements you did the right thing by getting it to the Respondent in time.

When you sent the email to the Court complaining of the conduct of the Respondent's representative did you make sure that you copied in the

Respondent's representative. I think you may have already picked up on the another golden rule that any correspondence to the Tribunal must be copied into the Respondent.

[ecalid]

Hi yes the respondent was CC'd email.

Sorry, the respondent is the representative and the client is the employer.

I am glad that I have done it. What are the chances of the court upholding my complaints?? And what could be the repercussions for the respondent in this event??

[ecalid]

I didn't specify in the email that I had also added the respondent into the email. But I sent the email to both the court and respondent, so the court should be able to see two recipients, is this acceptable for the courts?

[ecalid]

Also the respondent has responded to my email yesterday with an "automated" message saying that she is out of the office until tuesday.

Funnily enough I decided to sent it again out of curiosity and the automated email has not been sent again?

[ULA]

Well done

Thanks for the clarification that you refer to the respondent as the legal representative of your employer.

I never like to "odds" the Tribunal so would not like to "guess" at the chances of success. If they did then the Tribunal could determine to strike out some or part of the documentation/witness statement presented by the employer.

Please though I urge that you do not get your hopes up that this will happen.

[ecalid]

Just to update Ula

Still no witness statement after 6 days beyond the courts deadline.

No word from the court yet in regards to the application.

I have sent my complaint to the court.

I have also complained that the respondent intended to apply for a costs order up to the value of £20,000 + VAT if i did not discontinue my claim.

Their application to strike out then failed.

I have also complained that they sent me the ET3 prior to the court accepting their response.

I have sent all the evidence by post so hopefully a judge will see it.

Thanks

[ULA]

Thanks for the update. I know the Tribunals are a bit behind dealing with correspondence at the moment so do not expect a quick response from them.