ET Experience - Respondents witnesses not sworn in - Fraudulent document in bundle

[blackburn]

Hello Everyone,

I attended ET full hearing on 23, 24,and 25 of November in Southampton. The Respondent (University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust) invited 5 witnesses and me attended unrepresented.

I glad that I spent some time on preparing questions, because ET panel and Employment Judge did not ask the Respondents witnesses a single question! I was left to fight my case completely on my own. Also I expected that witnesses would be called into the room to give evidence literally. In reality all Respondents witnesses stayed in the room for the whole duration of the hearing. Once one witness gave false evidence, the next witness just repeated what the previous witness had said.

I still can not get that hearing off my head, and now I definitely know that only one of Respondents witnesses was asked to sworn in. I thought it's a requirement to read oath/affirmation, as I did myself before giving evidence-in-chief. Or its actually not?

Only after the hearing was over, I found out that the Respondent attached fraudulent document into the bundle. The Respondent made me feel really stupid at the hearing because I believed that the document is genuine and could not explain why it does not match what I said earlier.

I explained ET the reason as why document was fraudulent and informed ET that I will never accept ET decision based on fraud. The Respondent denied any allegation of fraud saying that I had plenty of time to check all documents. Still awaiting for reply from ET, but I do not trust ET any longer. Can I press legal charges for tampering with evidence, or that still needs to be ET decision? .

[ULA]

Whilst the Employment Tribunal is a court of law and a formal process will be followed, it is not as formal as criminal proceedings. All the witnesses, their companions and any members of the public, as they are public hearings unless otherwise stated, will sit together behind the area set out for the two parties. That is standard ET set-up for "in-person" hearings.

It is highly unlikely that witnesses were not sworn in or asked to affirm the truth of the evidence they were about to give.

Were the documents that you believe to be fraudulent part of the bundle that was exchanged prior to the hearing. If so the timescales for exchange to happen is normally well in advance, so how long before the hearing did you get the bundle? If it was well in time how did you come to the conclusion after the hearing that they were fraudulent and not in the time you had to prepare and review the bundle in advance of the hearing?

You say that you have "explained ET the reason as why document was fraudulent", how have you done this?

[blackburn]

Now I am 99% certain that only one of Respondents witnesses was sworn in.

I was giving evidence-in-chief first. I felt so nervous so forgot to stand up when I was asked to read affirmation..

But I remember that only Respondent's witness number #3 did stand up before reading affirmation. Immediately I thought how could I forget to stand up and why previous witnesses did not stand up. That's how I now know that they were not sworn in, because I would remember them reading oath/affirmation as witness #3 did.

It was so clear that respondents witness #4 (I am 99.9% certain that he was not sworn in either) was lying. It felt like hearing finally turning in my favour, but all of sudden Respondent did not call in his next witness #5, who actually was the most senior figure (band 8d role) and the most important one.

Instead EJ asked Respondents barrister and me to get closing statements and written submissions ready before 8.30am.

I submitted complain form stating that Respondents witnesses were not sworn in, but ET informed me today that they can only process complains regarding administration.

As far as fraudulent document is concerned, the Respondent kept adding documents after exchange date without asking my permission, That actually would be another story.

I stated that EJ is biased and suspect that EJ is also corrupt. I requested my case to be reinstated under different judge and to invite one more witness in order to investigate fraud,

Unfortunately ET does not allow hearing be recorded, Is it possible to check cameras if Respondents witnesses were sworn in and who can I ask to check?

[ULA]

HMCTS complaints process, as you have been informed by the ET, only looks at the way your case was handled by the administrative team not about the decision made in your case.

Have you had the written judgement yet?

As far a I am aware there are no cameras at ET hearings.

[blackburn]

Not received written judgement yet, but got reply from Respondents solicitor:

"We write in relation to the Claimant’s below email applying for the ET to invite a witness to give evidence.

The Claimant’s claim has already been heard at a full merits hearing in front of EJ [omitted] and a panel. The outcome of that hearing is that the Claimant was unsuccessful in his claim.

It is the Respondent’s position that, at this stage of proceedings, the Claimant has no further right to call additional witnesses / apply for a witness order."

Is that true? Also all Respondents witnesses attended the hearing, but only 4 out of 5 Rerspondents witnesses were giving evidence. Shouldn't all of them giving an evidence?

[ULA]

Given the detail of the email fron the Respondent's solicior it would appear, although you have not had the written judgement, you did receive the judge's decision at the hearing, which was that you were unsuccessful in your claim.

A Tribunal can order any person to attend a hearing to give evidence, produce documents, or produce information by way of an Order which needs to be requested and actioned prior to the hearing.

If you want a reconsideration of the outcome then you will need to make an application for this in writing to the Tribunal, copied to the Respondent's solicitor, within 14 days of the date on which the written record, or other written communication, of the original decision was sent to you or within 14 days of the date that the written reasons were sent (if later). This will need to set out in detail why the Tribunal should make a reconsideration of the original decision.

[blackburn]

Finally got written reasons emailed to me. These reasons are not the same as one were read to me at the end on the hearing, with all reference to fraudulent document being removed from the judgment.

I assume written decisions will not be sent to me unless I will make request? Only after I receive written decisions, I will have 14 days to submit application for reconsideration and 42 days to appeal? Or clock is already ticking?

How do I make request for decisions? Can I write to ET stating that I found written reasons totally biased and I need written decisions in order to appeal, or there is some formal request needed to be made?

Thank you for your assistance.

[ULA]

If you what you have been provided is a written recored of the decision given at the hearing, signed by the Employment Judge, then your timescales for reconsideratio or appeal start from the date they were sent.

[blackburn]

Written reasons were actually sent to me

[ULA]

The written judgement is the decision of the outcome. So the timing of the date this was sent has started the clock on your further options of reconsideration and/or appeal.

[blackburn]

Written reasons were sent to me as well, and I definitely would like to appeal. But as far as I know, I can appeal only if a legal mistake was made in an employment tribunal case

For example:

19. Firstly, an offer of employment was made to an applicant who, overall, had a lower point score than me.

But, ET accepted the Respondent's point of view:

25. Although he performed best of all the applicants in the technical test, it would be unsurprising if the Trust took the view, in the light of his interview, that he simply would not be a manageable employee and would present them with difficulties


Obviously the decision not to employ me was made on speculation that I would cause the Trust some difficulties (no further details given). No such feedback (that I would not be a manageable employee) has actually been provided to me by the Trust either.

ET ignored my point of view

(witness in chief statement #10) .... as Detective Columbo would say, one more thing that is bothering me how such a perceived by the Respondent unmanaged person as me somehow managed to be employed by academia, private businesses and healthcare (p172) institutions for 30+ years?

Is there any law that would invalidate speculative part of statement 25?

[ULA]

if you want to appeal then you need to do so by considering the following grounds when it comes to your case.

Either the employment tribunal made an error in law in reaching its decision for example, it misunderstood the law or did not apply the law correctly to the facts of your case or the decision is "perverse". A perverse decision arises where the tribunal reaches a decision to which no reasonable tribunal could have come to based on the evidence before it. However you should be aware that appeals on the grounds that the decision was perverse rarely succeed.

You cannot make your appeal to the EAT based on a re-hearing of the original tribunal and you should be aware, given the content of your earlier posts, that witness evidence is very rarely allowed.

When you prepare your notice of appeal it must clearly identify the point of law at issue or the particulars of the alleged perversity.