Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

[Brighton-cpe]

Hi beagles,

I have an oral hearing 3(10) at the EAT in Feb. I have to submit the bundle (Including Skeleton argument) in 10 days and make a submission for fresh evidence. It appears that the Respondent did not comply with the disclosure rules.

I need some serious help as my argument rests on the fact that my employer failed under S6(1) duty as they did not carry out an assessment to enable them to decide what steps would be reasonable to prevent me from being at a disadvantage, following my putting them on notice of a potential disability. Evidence of this cleverly omitted first time around.

Case law

Mid Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust v Cambridge [2003]

Any help would be much appreciated

I am a bit lost with Skeleton arguments
and
Submission of fresh evidence procedure.

Best wishes

Brighton

[Hurricane Puffrose]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

bumped and highlighted or militant

[miliitant]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

Sorry i am tired

this is an eat1

give me 5 minutes

[Brighton-cpe]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

Thanks for the advice on the skeleton, I am starting to piece together caselaw...and looking to accentuate the negligence and breach of duty of care in the skeleton. Question: do I include a chronology under 3(10)?

I did not push the respondent to comply, as I had a solicitor whom was handling my case....seems like this could be possible negligence on the solicitors behalf. The evidence was requested and its existence denied by the Respondent solicitor....therefore would this satisfy the criteria for fresh evidence Ladd v Marshall?

sorry i dont understand your question: under what "regulations'? I quoted the S6 (1) from Mid Staffordshire General Hospitals NHS Trust v Cambridge [2003] and dont really understand it!

I will be the appellant at the EAT 3 (10) The letter from registrar states "your attention is drawn to Employmennt Appeal Practice Direction 2008 Paragraphs 6, 13 and 14 concerning the filing of bundles, Skeleton arguments and Authorities for the forthcoming hearing."

No evidence has been exchanged as the hearing is appellant only under 3 (10) the respondent is currently disclosing further evidence under a Subject Access made to them. I dont think I have to send anything over to Respondents.

No problem, your questions are good, however I am not sure how to answer all of them.

best wishes

Brighton

[miliitant]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

SORRY

THIS IS AN EAT

IME TIRED

GIVE ME 5 MINUTES

i am trying to build up a picture

DO YOU KNOW THE PRACTICE DIRECTIONS

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...v-PYzG3X9Q4oNQ

[miliitant]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

May i ask also why your "disability" was not mentioned in the original tribunal by you, i realise your solicitor may have not been up to the job but i need to cover all angles

my argument rests on the fact that my employer failed under S6(1) duty as they did not carry out an assessment to enable them to decide what steps would be reasonable to prevent me from being at a disadvantage, following my putting them on notice of a potential disability. Evidence of this cleverly omitted first time around.

WAS THIS MENTIONED IN THE ORIGINAL TRIBUNAL BY YOU

it a point of law to allow the appeal i am digging at , thats a failing on the proceedure first time round

[Brighton-cpe]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

Hi Miliitant,

yes I am aware of the Employment Appeal Tribunal Practice Direction, however not too well versed!

Regards

Brighton

[Brighton-cpe]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

My "disability" was mentioned the first time around and the respondent did their best to say that I was not disabled. In the judgement I was found to be disabled at material times and disabled for means of the equality act.

The S6(1) duty of care was not mentioned in the original tribunal and indeed the respondent has covered up the fact that I put them on notice in a conversation attempting to cover the breach of their duty of care to the employee.

I think this could well be a point of law to appeal on, what do you think?....just the fact that the respondent has covered evidence up should be some kind of admonition of their guiltiness.

Am just watching the select committe rooms on the Bbc, taking about the tribunals and appeals process. Very interesting for me..going on until 11pm

Look forward to hear from you.


best wishes

Brighton

[SpringerSpaniel]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

Presumably as they have already denied that they could consider you too have a disability, they have to concede that they did not make the required assessment and did not make any reasonable steps or reasonable adjustments ?

However, the issue as to argument at Appeal stage is as to what was argued at first instance and whether this point was raised but not correctly handled by the Tribunal. You cannot introduce new arguments at this stage, even if they are valid ones.

[Brighton-cpe]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

Hi Springer,

thanks for your post.

Im sorry...I dont quite follow your first point. Could you elaborate?

It is very hard for me to remember what was argued first time around as I had a very weak barrister representing me who was pretty useless.

In the judgement it mentions :

"whether the Respondents had failed to comply with the duty to take such steps as was reasonable to have to take to avoid the disadvantage" this could be where they failed in their duty of care to care out a proper risk assessment.
I am not necessarily sure if the duty of care argument is a original part of the claim or a new argument I would guess it is from the original claim...however the judgment only makes reference to the duty of care a handful of times.

hope this makes sense.

Regards

Brighton

[SpringerSpaniel]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

can you post a redacted judgement on here ?

[Brighton-cpe]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

Hi Springer decision uploaded in pdf format with OCR text recognised to enable quick searches.

Best wishes

Brighton

[SpringerSpaniel]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

and can you also post your Grounds of Appeal t the EAT please ?

[Brighton-cpe]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

Hi this springer,

please find the grounds of appeal...

[Brighton-cpe]

Re: Oral hearing at the EAT 3(10)

Hi Springer,

please find a transcript of the conversation that was witheld by the respondent during the Employment tribunal proceedings.

It very clearly states that I put the R's on notice of an impending disability. The call was ‘a clear indication of impending illness’ as found by the Court of Appeal Dickins v O2 Plc [2008] EWCA Civ 1144

It was very clearly omitted as it should have had a huge impact on the case and highlights the serious negligence on behalf on part of the senior management within the company.

The HR manager very clearly states that this would be dealt with as quickly as possible and all work would be dropped and get back in touch with me as soon as possible. I never heard from the HR manager again.

Please bear in mind I disclosed very personal, sensitive information which I had not even disclosed to close family members.

This added to the humiliation and victimisation I was subjected to and so much pain suffering and illness could have been avoided if senior manager had acted with Integrity.

Springer and any other Beagles, how could this new evidence impact on my case?

Best wishes

Brighton