Overriding Objective Employment Tribunal

[Ediepeedie]

Good Evening,

I have a reconsideration hearing soon (via skype) and being a litigant in person, I have no legal support. However, the respondent has instructed both counsel and solicitor to attend. (I won my case of disability discrimination by the way)

Under Rule 2 - do I have just cause to raise the following points with regards to the overriding objective:

1. Ensuring parties are on equal footing - my view is, this is intimidating and I don't feel this is placing me on equal footing when its 2 against 1.
2. Saving Expense - The Respondent often refers to this when it's something I request - can I bring cost to the Judge's attention also i.e. why the need for 2 reps?

I would also like to add, this is a classic David & Goliath Case whereby to date the Respondent has spent over £50k defending the claim.

Grateful for your expert advice where possible please.

[ULA]

It is often the case at tribunal hearings where the respondent, depending on the size of organisation will be represented and if so as a minimum will have a solicitor handle the case. Depending on what the nature of the claim is then the solicitor may advise that a barrister be instructed to actually conduct the hearing on behalf of the client. Equally this situation may well be against a claimant who is a litigant in person.

Tribunal judges/panel members are often faced with litigants in person and they do try to ensure that they are helped through any difficulties that they may face in such a hearing.

Given that the respondent lost a disability discrimination claim it is likely that they want to try and ensure the best possible representation, which they have a right to do, at the reconsideration hearing.

If you feel that you can argue a strong enough case to raise the issue under Rule 2 then ultimately it would be down to the tribunal judge to either agree or not and advise accordingly.

[Ediepeedie]

Thank you ULA