EAT Hearings

[Guest]

that sums it up.

also, para 8 etc

[standupforyourself]

Hi Muggedbyosmosis,

I am in a situation with a costs application against me and am worried as to what level of costs may be awarded. What costs were awarded against you if you don't mind me asking? Looking at the case law and examples of costs awards it varies so much so it doesn't really help anyone with a potential order to try and work out what the effect would be of an award.

Many thanks

[smokejumper]

Why are you getting these costs orders Mugged and Standup.

[standupforyourself]

Not got an order yet but will hear the outcome once my finance info is sent in ( which I have done ). I didn't agree to settle and an order wasn't complied with.... That was my ex solicitors fault for not telling me what needed to be provided!!!! Claim was found to be genuine .

[smokejumper]

So now they are saying you should settle even if it's not to your satisfaction,

 

They should just do away with this ET system, not fit for purpose.

[Muggedbyosmosis]

Hello,

 

I have a full EAT hearing due in a couple of months. I have been fortunate to get some 'pro bono' support from a barrister through a local legal centre. The barrister will represent me at the hearing, which is an enormous relief.

 

The letter I got from the centre confirming this good news today went on to stress that I should be aware that the barrister does not work like a solicitor, but doesn't go into any details about what that means.

 

Can anyone enlighten me as to what this should mean to me? I have no idea. Will I not see the barrister ahead of the hearing? Should I prepare the main thrust of the appeal? Do I need to now find a solicitor?

 

If anyone could tell me what this means that would be most helpful.

[rebel11]

Hi Mugged

 

It would be best to email the law centre to find out exactly what services the Barrister will be offering Pro-bono and what they require you to prepare for the case. What ever we think might be completely wrong. You don't want any surprises on the day.

[steampowered]

Barristers generally provide representation at the hearing. Solicitors have general conduct of a matter which means they deal with everything else associated with the hearing. That includes dealing with the disclosure process, preparing witness statements, dealing with letter between you and the other side's solicitors, dealing with settlement offers, agreeing the contents of and preparing the hearing bundles, dealing with tribunal documentation and so on. In other words, you will need to do the legwork.

[Muggedbyosmosis]

hello,

 

I have a date for myfull ET hearing now. i have just recieved a further lette from the ET giving me deadlines for the submission of bundles and skeleton arguements and any supporting documentation/authorities.

 

The letter further asks that all documentation carries the names of the parties, the case number and the hearing date.

 

Soooo, at the risk of sounding like an idiot, does those details just have to appear on the front of each individual folder into which the arguements, bundles etc; go, or do the details have to be written on every page in the bundle, every page of the skelton arguements etc;

 

Sorry if it sounds daft - but I want to get things right.

[steampowered]

Only on the cover/spines of bundles, not on every page. The purpose is to ensure that when you send documents to the ET, the ET staff can find the correct case file.

[Muggedbyosmosis]

Phew, thanks a lot steampowered I shall do as you advise.

 

Working through the guidance I see that I am restricted in the amount of supporting documentation I can submit without getting pesmission from the EAT - they only allow 50 pages. the documents I want to submit come to more than that figure and I need to send in an 'essential reading list' to the EAT to get more than 50 pages submitted. Ok, I get that. Could anyone please tell me what an 'essential reading list' looks like, the sort of content it should contain? any advice would be a great help right now.

 

cheers.

[Pusillanimous]

You need only requisition permission if it is over 50 pages in section 8.2.10 "further documents".

 

As the ET1, ET3, The Judgment, the written reasons, the EAT1 and the EAT3 are almost certainly going to be >50 pages, this would not be realistic otherwise.

 

EDITED.

[steampowered]

What guidance are you referring to?

[Pusillanimous]

The OP is referring to the EAT Practice DIrections (2013 version) re Section 8: Papers for the hearing, which have to be in exact format.

[Muggedbyosmosis]

The OP is referring to the EAT Practice DIrections (2013 version) re Section 8: Papers for the hearing, which have to be in exact format.

 

Hi, sorry for not being more specific earlier. Yes, that is the section. OK with ET1 etc; but the documents I want to use from the bundle itself exceed 50, and thinking about it, the other side are going to want include some of theirs as well I suppose. So, does anyone then know in what format the essential reading list should be? Are there any examples knocking around the net?

[Pusillanimous]

You need to make a formal application to include the extra pages stating reason (for example, complex case, fresh evidence).

 

The reading list needs to highlight which specific parts of these documents the Judges should take note of (indicate paragraph with vertical line in the margin) cross-indexed. The idea is they can go staight to the relevant point/s without needing to plough through it all or missing an important point.

 

Be careful about including bundle items as the EAT will not re-look at the evidence, but rather the reasoning of the judgment. They focus on a very narrow scope so you need to indicate which bits of the bundle support an error of law or perversity.

[steampowered]

Oh, I hadn't quite appreciated that this was an EAT case rather than an ET case.

 

The number of pages you are allowed for appeals is short, because appeals do not reconsider the whole case. The EAT will only examine questions of law. The EAT will not re-examine or re-consider factual evidence, and it will not hear evidence from any witnesses, because you cannot appeal on questions of fact. It is crucial that you understand and accept this, and do not try to treat the EAT like it is just Employment Tribunal round 2, because it is not.

 

An attempt to start bringing in background documents will not go down well, because these are not really relevant to questions of law. When you are appealing it is important to be selective.

 

A reading list is very simple - just a numbered list of documents you think the judge should read, together with a rough estimate of how long you think it will take to read them.

[Muggedbyosmosis]

Many thanks to you both steampowered and Pusillanimous, you have made things very clear for me.

 

I had a short telephone conversation with my 'opponents' yesterday and they seem more amiable than before. Maybe things can be sorted out to everybody's satisafaction.

[Muggedbyosmosis]

Hello again, another simple question for the site.

 

I have to submit a chronology with my paperwork (arguement). Am I right in thinking that I start with the most recent date/event at the top and work my way downwards as I go 'back in time' to the original issue/problem I had with my employer?

 

Also how expansive can I be in the chronology? I know I can't be writing two pages of notes for each date/event but is it OK to have a one/two sentence summary where needed?

 

For example do I list one important event in the chronology as just: 13th October 2014 - Internal (formal) grievance hearing.

 

Or can I say a little more such as: 13th October 2014 - Internal (formal) grievance hearing. (Not all events listed by claimant considered at the hearing, investigated officer limited discussion to one minor episode of verbal abuse by manager - grievance not upheld).

 

I hope that makes sense.

[Pusillanimous]

The Eat does tend to want chronology in reverse order, starting with Judgment appealed from and working backwards to the ET1. That's not to say you cannot put your "other documents" in chronological orde, as it might be more logical to do so.

 

Expand on the index narrative, but NOT focusing on detail, but rather the point of law you claim is in error, so the judges can see at a glance how it's relevant. Keep it concise and easy to read.

 

The detail if relevant should have been in your EAT1. However, you can always elaborate this when you present your case at the hearing from your skeleton, which should, ideally, be no more than a page.

[steampowered]

Personally I would avoid including anything more than bare minimum details in the chronology. The purpose of the chronology is to be read alongside the other documents, it shouldn't be used as a document designed to persuade by itself.

[Muggedbyosmosis]

Hi, I have had a read around the issue of costs warnings and I'm only a little the wiser. I assume because it is such a rare occurence for a hearing to award costs that it is a bit of a grey area?

 

Are there any hard and fast rules as to what constitutes a costs warning? Does it have to be in writing - or can an off the record verbal 'threat' count as one? Should it also tell you how much costs you are potentially facing? How much notice should a claimant recieve about such a figure?

 

I can't seem to find much guidance on it, so if anyone can help that would be really useful.

 

Cheers

[dx100uk]

5 threads on almost the same issue merged

 

 

please keep to one thread

 

 

dx

[Muggedbyosmosis]

apologies - I didn't know about the thread(s) rules. I will just 'repost' the query here as well.

Edited November 11, 2014 by honeybee13
Duplication.

[honeybee13]

apologies - I didn't know about the thread(s) rules. I will just 'repost' the query here as well.

 

Hello there.

 

I've edited what you posted above because it's already contained in post #96 of this thread. The reason for keeping to one thread is so the information stays together, it helps the people trying to advise you.

 

HB