Thanks for the advice. Do I have to pay costs straightaway (after the tribunal decision) or do I wait for the result of an EAT appeal decision?

Yes thanks, I'm within the time limit - I am quite concerned about getting the info. I am entitled too; so the question is how much info. should the Tribunal supply - i.e. reasons for costs with corresponding figures and costs split across the two claims - is that a reasonable expectation?

Hi, I have to submit an appeal against a judgement - two claims struck out and a costs award. The judgement itself was very brief (one page!) and there is no explanation as to how the level of costs were arrived at and how they relate to each claim. I would hope to have this information for the EAT hearing, but am I entitled to ask the Tribunal for it?

Thanks again Pusillanimous, I was sworn in to read my statement near the beginning - so that would hold for the discussion on costs. Should the judge have known in the meeting that the respondents had issued a 'costs warning' prior to the hearing - or is that a procedural no-no before he reaches a judgement in the hearing?

Hi steampowered, I should have been more accurate (and altered the query slightly) - I was interested in challenging the costs award. It was mostly in-house personnel. On what basis do they charge the hourly rate? I'm told it is a notional figure.

Thanks Pusillanimous, the notes have now arrived. The CMD notes say that I had to submit an explanation on a key point ahead of the PHR, which I have done (and sent to the respondents as well). The respondent's have written to me claiming that (at the CMD) we also discussed putting together a small bundle of evidence ahead of the PHR and they want to see supporting documentation for my explanatory note. This was not discussed at the CMD and the tribunal's notes of the CMD make no mention of it either. What should I do? Ignore the respondent? Prepare supporting documentary evidence which I can hand out at the PHR if needed (which would seem the sensible thing to me) or something else? Any help would be good.

Hi, once a CMD has been held, how long should it be before the Tribunal sends out the notes to both parties? Is there a time limit laid down that we can hold them too? I have been waiting for a fortnight - is that length of time usual for a Tribunal?

Sorry, need to bump this back up - it is important though. Can I challenge a decision made at a CMD and put it before an EAT before the main hearing - or do I have to wait until after the main hearing (i.e. if my claim fails in part due to a judge's decision at CMD)? Thanks.

Hi, sorry to be a bit thick on this point - can I challenge a decision made at a CMD hearing or do I have to wait for the main hearing to have concluded before I can challenge any decision made by the Tribunal? When the Tribunal wrote to me limiting the number of words in my witness statement there was no explanation - there was merely a figure in brackets for the amount of words I could use.

Hi, I have to deal with a preliminary (and important point) at a PHR before the main hearing. Does a written submission for a PHR require a certain format/elements/template or can I just lay out the facts as I see them and deal with the point in question? Furthermore should I supply supporting documentary evidence with the submission or bring it along to the PHR? Any advice would be really useful thanks.

Hi ericsbrother, we never really exchanged any documents. They made up a bundle that included some documents I needed (and a lot of documents I didn't - and neither do they I suspect). When I subsequently sent across my list/documents they simply said no to most of them being included.

Thanks becky2585, the content of the bundle has already been horribly contended. The respondents have already produced a bundle with only some of my documents in. They refuse to let any more in - including some documents I will be referring to in my witness statement. At the CMD meeting the judge decided that the respondent's bundle would be treated as the trial bundle and if I wanted to add any more documents they should go into a supplementary bundle. The judge at the CMD hearing then went on to warn me that the panel will read the trial bundle to get a feel of the case but that they rarely read the supplementary bundle! I complained about this unbalanced 'curate's egg' solution at the CMD - but my protestations fell on deaf ears I'm afraid. In my witness statement, if I refer to (my) documents in the supplementary bundle - will they even get looked at by the Tribunal panel?

Hi SNALF, as regards structure I was intending to simply go through what happened in chronological order. Is there more that I should be doing for the witness statement?

Hi, there are plenty of threads on this (excellent) forum which highlight many of the ways that respondents will attempt to restrict evidence (against them) in the bundle being brought before the Tribunal panel. Can respondents also control/restrict what goes into the claimant's witness statement as well or is the content of the claimant's witness statement 'off-limits' to interference from the respondent?

Thanks Emmzzi, I'm mindful, in my statement, to stick to the issues that the Tribunal are being asked to consider. To go 'off-piste' would lose some of the claims impact/focus. However is it a normal practice to restrict one side to a word count limit and not the other side? Would it be an EAT issue if my claim was unsuccessful?

Thanks again for the advice. Going over my notes of the CMD hearing again, there was a curio that I had forgotten - it may not be significant. The judge who presided over the CMD decided to impose a word (count) limit on my witness statement, yet would not impose any similar word count limit on the statements of the five witnesses that the respondent has lined up. Is this a normal/acceptable practice?

Hi, thanks for the advice so far. The PHR hasn't happened yet. The 'noise' is coming from the respondents.

Hi honeybee13, the judge at my CMD hearing arranged a PHR meeting to discuss the merits of the claim. He mentioned that it may be a possibility at this PHR meeting that the judge (hearing the PHR) may decide the case has little chance of success if it went forward. If so, I may receive a costs warning and I may have to pay a deposit (£500 perhaps). If I then took the case forward and if I lost the claim then I could be liable for the other side's costs. As sure as night follows day, after the CMD, the respondent's solicitors sent me a letter stating they would be seeking a costs order at the PHR.

Hi, I now have a PHR meeting due to discuss my claim. I have been warned that I may face a costs warning if the case only has a small chance of success. What sort of costs would I be liable for and would I have to pay the whole amount or would my circumstances be taken into account? (I'm on benefits at the moment). Bit of a worry.

Thanks for the advice, I shall be doing some swotting this week-end.

Hi, praticaly all correspondence I receive from my respondent's solicitors is liberally peppered with quoted sections from various procedures and legislation. So much so it does induce a certain amount of word-blindness and unease (which I think is part of the reason it is included!). Are there a few basic pieces of legislation and/or guidance notes that I should be looking at in order to appreciate the overall business of the Tribunal and the responsibilities of both the claimant and the respondent. The tribunal service sent me a few very basic booklets - but nothing that covers the procedural tomfoolery of my respondent's solicitors. Any pointers would be most useful.

Thanks becky2585, I have asked around and I simply can't afford the five figure sums asked for - I didn't think it would be inexpensive, but the way the charges are structured was a surprise - and more expensive than I had thought. Can the Tribunal insist that a claim has to be supported by legal representation rather than the claimant simply representing her/him self?

Hi, despite personal financial problems I am looking to employ a legal professional for my ET hearing. There are still a number of issues that the respondent has not resolved (missing documents etc) which still need chasing up. Once I have a solicitor can I still continue to chase up the respondent about these pre-hearing issues (at relatively little expense to me) or can the respondent insist on only dealing with my appointed legal representative (at considerable expense to me)?

Thanks for your advice becky2585, if I may, could I ask how are these two separate yet similar claims are then handled in one hearing? Would I have to produce one witness statement covering both claims, or two witness statements - one for each claim? Are they still to be considered as two claims or as one (two-part) claim?

Hi, I have a short hearing due soon for constructive dismissal. I also have a longer discrimination case due in several months time. The respondent has requested that both of these be heard as one case at the later date. Although I feel both claims are causally related (in that bringing the discrimination case I lost my job) I would rather there were held separately rather than muddled up. Should I be concerned by the respondent's request? What advantages can they gain by this request?