Unusual behaviour from respondents lawyer

[Chambertin]

Hi there, I have an unusual scenario in my ongoing litigation. I have been conducting my case primarily through my personal account in terms of dealing with the tribunal and the respondent legal representative.

As we’re exchanging evidence for the bundle I can only provide so much from my personal account but the great bulk of my evidence has to come from my .gov account. I am unable to forward that evidence to my personal account as that would be breaching security.

i asked the respondents lawyer if he had an egress account that I could upload documents to from my .gov account but he declined to give it to me. I said I’ll have to just email him the evidence them from my .gov account. He said he doesn’t know the policy of my organisation but doesn’t think it is appropriate to do so.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it at all.

anyway, after forwarding the evidence from my .gov account he emailed my line manager on spec about sending evidence to his csjm account from mine.

The complicating factor is that my line manager is one of the people who I am bringing to Tribunal. He says I shouldn’t be using my .gov account to bring proceedings against my Gov department, but he doesn’t know the policy - it was a speculative complaint.

It feels to me like he is inviting the respondents to victimise me for bringing a complaint.

There is no other way to get evidence to him. I’m not going to breach established security policy by emailing official documents to my personal account and he refused to set up an egress. Any thoughts?

[ULA]

The other way to have these documents included in the bundle is to send a list of them to the respondent's representative and request that they are disclosed by the respondent because they are material to your claim.

[Chambertin]

Thank you. So have I done wrong by sending them directly to the respondents representative or does that seem a valid route to disclosure?

[Chambertin]

The instructions from the tribunal reads:

By 7 November 2022, the claimant will provide to the respondent copies of any additional documents not on that list upon which he intends to rely.

So, I have complied with the instructions as written. What do you think of the lawyers behaviour though? It’s odd isn’t it?

He knows I have my employer over a barrel in hugely significant ways and he has been a bit overzealous in his defence, taking it personally and being quite rude (not that I mind a robust argument) but what he has done here seems really quite improper.

Any thoughts on his behaviour?

[ULA]

If you have complied with the Orders and provided any additional documents you want in the bundle then that is fine.

You say that "your line manager is one of the people who I am bringing to Tribunal" are they acting as a witness for you?

[Chambertin]

No, against.

[Chambertin]

does anyone have any assessment of the lawyers behaviour here?

[ULA]

Please can I remind you that all of us who provide our advice do so freely and in our own time, so you may not always get an immediate response.

From what you have said and given your manager is not a witness for you, I see nothing untoward about the respondent's representative, they are at liberty to speak with individuals who the respondent has said can provide information, witness statements etc in respect of your claim. Given that you work for the government I am aware that there are strict policies in place about what can/cannot be emailed from an @ gov accounts to personal email accounts even if they are your own.

As I suggested in an earlier post, if there are document contained on an @gov email account that you want included as part of the bundle then you have the opportunity to request disclosure of these via the respondent's representative.

[Chambertin]

Thank you.

To clarify:

the respondents lawyer has spoken to one of the people whom I have complained about (my line manager) with a speculative complaint that I may or may not have violated policy by submitting evidence from my .gov account.

I told the lawyer that I couldn’t send the evidence to my personal account for onward transmission as that would be breaching security protocols. I asked the lawyer if he would set up an egress account so I could pad him my evidence in compliance with the tribunals order. He didn’t provide an egress account and instead waited until I had forwarded from my gov account and then raised a speculative complaint with my line manager.

If they discipline me then that amounts to a victimisation, induced by their lawyer, no?

[ULA]

The lawyer is not obliged to set up an egress account and I am not sure that even this would be covered by the government policies in place regarding forwarding information from an @ gov email account.

I have already set out the best way in which you could have tried to manage this issue in respect of disclosing the documents contained in an @ gov account into the bundle.

If you have contravened government policies, then potentially there may be some repercussions.

Is your claim for discrimination?