Employment Tribunal

[AVB]

I have spent the last 7 days in an Employment Tribunal acting as a defence witness for my employer in a case of sexual harassment, Sexual discrimination and breach of contract. What a farce. 91 allegations completely made up by a woman who is after a lot of money. And I mean a LOT of money. Verdict is tomorrow and our QC, who was absolutely brilliant, is extremely confident of complete vindication. Then we will be going after her for costs and the bill is up to £250,000 at the moment.

 

I have not have had experience of courts before and although it wasn't a court of law it was apparently similar. I found giving evidence extremely stressful although not as stressful as it was for the plaintiff who was ripped apart by our QC. I think QC's are absolute ******** at heart but I am glad I had a good one on my side.

[Mungler]

You can't beat watching a good advocate.

 

You could sell tickets

[AVB]

You can't beat watching a good advocate.

 

You could sell tickets

 

Well ours up against a 'litigant in person' so it wasn't much of a battle. Still impressive to see how she operated. I also did some witness training which gave some insight into how barristers operate. We ran through case studies as examples of giving evidence. I started off poorly. Was ripped apart.

 

What does a top, city, QC make?

[Mungler]

The most expensive one I coughed for from a leading Chancery set was £15k plus VAT for a 3 hour interlocutory hearing.

 

Then they have their written opinions and advices and conferences out of hours.

 

In a word "plenty"

[AVB]

The most expensive one I coughed for from a leading Chancery set was £15k plus VAT for a 3 hour interlocutory hearing.

 

Then they have their written opinions and advices and conferences out of hours.

 

In a word "plenty"

 

Ouch. She told me she had to earn £85K just to pay for her nanny (minus of course tax and chambers fees) so I guessed it was big bucks.

 

I got chatting to mine and she was really quite a nice person outside of court. A couple of things really impressed me in court though.

 

1) She could predict, word for word, what the judge would say and do - She was telepathic

2) Her ability to cross reference everything. If anybody said anything she could immediately spot where they had contradicted themselves in witness statement or e-mails going back 6 years.

 

One very sharp lady.

[storme37]

my wife was trained as a barester

Edited April 26, 2012 by storme37

[Mungler]

my wife was trained as a barester

 

I love coffee me

[CZ550Kevlar]

My uncle is a barrister and teaches law at University of Kent, i often think he is giving acting lessons the way the coaching goes to appeal to the jury etc.

[storme37]

My uncle is a barrister and teaches law at University of Kent, i often think he is giving acting lessons the way the coaching goes to appeal to the jury etc.

my wife probably knows him lol

[CZ550Kevlar]

my wife probably knows him lol

 

highly possible, very highly i would say. I think he trained/specialised in European law of some sort before i joined the bar or whatever the term is they use.

[MM]

my wife was trained as a barester

 

 

I love coffee me

 

 

my wife probably knows him lol

 

 

yeah, he has tgwo sugars gold this, best thread ever :lol:

[activeviii]

my wife was trained as a barester

 

Im sure mine was as well, i cant get away with anything

[storme37]

highly possible, very highly i would say. I think he trained/specialised in European law of some sort before i joined the bar or whatever the term is they use.

she works as a solicitor in dover now does your uncle come from the chambers in canterbury

[sodylt1]

Good Point London luke! .... edited

 

I spent 3 days in court for an employer defending an unfait dismissal case for a guy that was caught stelaing!

 

 

 

It was an awsone experience to see how people at that level in law operate ........ and we won the case ie.

Edited April 27, 2012 by sodylt1

[LondonLuke]

I would be careful what you post on here especially whilst trial in motion. You do not want to fin yourself on the other side of the bench for discussing the case on here

[evo]

I would be careful what you post on here especially whilst trial in motion. You do not want to fin yourself on the other side of the bench for discussing the case on here

:good: dont think you should be mentioning a case anywhere,,but good luck anyway

[storme37]

an employment tribunal is not a trial in fact im surprised your going to get your costs costs are not usually awarded in tribunals theres more to this than meets the eye

Edited April 27, 2012 by storme37

[twitchynik]

an employment tribunal is not a trial in fact im surprised your going to get your costs costs are not usually awarded in tribunals theres more to this than meets the eye

As opposed to the distinct lack of punctuation which is definitely missing.

[storme37]

As opposed to the distinct lack of punctuation which is definitely missing.

so what its a thead not a novel your point is?

Edited April 27, 2012 by storme37

[Tug]

Costs are usually awarded to the winner, and it's highly unusual for any counsel to take on an ET case if there is not a good probability of success.

 

Oh, and for the record. I would like to add to the sentiments above;

Punctuation. Costs. Nothing. But. Means. Everything.

[pegasus bridge]

I was involved as a witness in a tribunal hearing, on behalf of a girl bringing a case against the company i used to work for, it was supposed to go on for 2 days, ended up over 10, with her barrister doing most of it 'pro-bono' (nothing to do with U2 either!), i did find the attempts by the companys barrister to question my integrity more irritating than stressful. the company lost and had some very negative press, and lots of very critical comments from the tribunal chair.

it was a fascinating process to watch though, both barristers had come up from London and were apparently specialists in this field.

[pegasus bridge]

Costs are usually awarded to the winner, and it's highly unusual for any counsel to take on an ET case if there is not a good probability of success.

 

Oh, and for the record. I would like to add to the sentiments above;

Punctuation. Costs. Nothing. But. Means. Everything.

 

I thought that costs were not awarded in tribunals? unless in circumstances where one party has been obstructive (or something along those lines?)

[storme37]

costs are not awarded usually its to stop people dropping cases because the employer gets an expensive lawyer but there are some exceptions. Employment Tribunals don't usually order either side to pay costs (called “expenses” in Scotland) unless either:

they decide you or your employer acted unreasonably in bringing (or in the case of the employer, defending) the case

you or your employer or any representatives at the hearing behave unreasonably

In this case the Employment Tribunal can order one party to pay costs of up to £10,000. In exceptional circumstances more can be awarded.

 

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/ResolvingWorkplaceDisputes/Employmenttribunals/DG_173242

[Tug]

Employment Tribunals don't usually order either side to pay costs (called “expenses” in Scotland) unless either:

they decide you or your employer acted unreasonably in bringing (or in the case of the employer, defending) the case

 

Hence why a lot of firms don't take them on unless they have a good chance of winning, usually on the basis that if it's cut and dry then the other side can be shown to be unreasonable.

[storme37]

im guessing very few people get costs awarded at tribunals by doing so it would look bad and employees would claim its putting them of going to tribunal