Perjury in the ET

[Promula]

If a respondent's witness commits perjury on a central issue in the case by contradicting their own witness statement and the tribunal doesn't spot it and instead makes contradictory findings of fact which causes you to lose, is your only option to appeal, or can you report the perjury, which is proved by the contradictory findings of fact in the judgment, to the police?

[echat11]

Hi PROMULA

I don't think the police would be interested (a lot of it goes on from Claimants and Respondents), you can ask for a 'reconsideration hearing', but time limits apply, 14 days.

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribun...lose-your-case

Example -

https://assets.publishing.service.go...dgement_and_Re asons_on_Reconsideration_2424032-2017.pdf

[Promula]

Tried that. Refused but by a one word email, no reconsideration judgment or reasons given.

[echat11]

https://www.gov.uk/appeal-employment-appeal-tribunal

ULA Can you look and advise, many thanks.

[Promula]

Can an employment judge correct their own contradictory findings of fact via the reconsideration process? It seems very strange to refuse to do that when it's obvious, and to not give any reasons for not doing it. It's impossible to appeal reasons that don't exist. Only the failure to give reasons can be appealed

[ULA]

Under reconsideration if the Judge who considers the application believes that there is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked then they will refuse the application and both you and the respondent would have been notified accordingly.

Your next course of action if you do which to take it further is to appeal the decision which you need to do within 42 days from the date on which the written reasons were sent to you. The below link may be useful as it sets out the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) rules:

https://assets.publishing.service.go...unal-rules.pdf

An appeal must be on a point of law, i.e. it must identify flaws in the legal reasoning of the original decision. The Employment Appeal Tribunal will not normally re-examine issues of fact.

There is a specifc form to complete the EAT Form 1 and you will need to provide the ET1, ET3, the judgement, the application for reconsideration and the outcome of that application.

[Promula]

Thanks. However, refusal reasons were requested but have not been sent. Have waited four months and chased three times.

[echat11]

Thanks. However, refusal reasons were requested but have not been sent. Have waited four months and chased three times.

https://www.gov.uk/government/organi...ints-procedure

[ULA]

If you have waited 4 months have you put in an appeal or decided not to progress with this?

[echat11]

https://www.complaints.judicialcondu...alscomplaints/

[Promula]

"If you have waited 4 months have you put in an appeal or decided not to progress with this?"

How can I appeal? I've been given nothing to appeal against i.e. no judgement or reasons. So my only option is to appeal against the error of law in not providing a judgment and reasons, right?

[ULA]

Sorry I am confused you said in your first post the case had been lost. How do you know this without being given a Judgement either on the day or sent at a later date to both you and the respondent by the Tribunal.

What you are appealing when you go to the EAT is the orignal Judgement on the case. The process of reconsideration is an interim step you can take if you can act within the 14 days, however it does not stop you from raising the appeal as this needs to be done within the 42 days from the judgement given from the ET hearing.

[Promula]

I appealed the original judgement and reasons. I also want to appeal the reconsideration judgment but the ET won't provide it. Are you saying that a reconsideration judgment cannot be appealed? I have seen many reconsideration judgments appealed on the EAT judgments website.

[ULA]

If there has been a reconsideration applicaion then an EAT in its judgement can make a finding that the ouctome of a decision on reconsideration cannot stand. This sits alongside the ET's decision on the original findings of the ET.