Support needed for my ET Claim - Disability Discrimination + Constructive Dismissal

Masomnia wrote: »

Most threads on this board where people are alleging they've been discriminated against and/or constructively dismissed they just get told they have no case, their dismissal was fair, they won't succeed, can't prove anything etc.

So I wouldn't bother tbh.

Leave it with the professionals.

That is because most threads on here haven't either been discriminated against or constructively dismissed in law! And since the OP is a litigant in person, which professionals do you suggest that they leave it to?

In tribunal proceedings there are no dramatic disclosure moments. Evidence is exchanged long before the tribunal. Anything which has been or will be said in the evidence bundle can be freely discussed. Tribunals do not remotely resemble court room dramas. They are quite boring really.

I note from your previous posting that your employer was enforcing a contractual change - why did you resign rather than wait for them to dismiss? Unlike unfair dismissal, discrimination claims require the claimant to evidence that discrimination may have taken place - the employer is assumed to be innocent until there is evidence they may not be. This makes such claims more complex, especially since people often confuse an employer doing something to a disabled person with an employer doing something because a person is disabled. The former is not discrimination, the latter is! That's really simplistic as an explanation, but it's the easiest way to explain.

Constructive dismissal, on the other hand, operates like ordinary unfair dismissal in many ways. The employer is required to prove their innocence, and the easiest way to do this is often that the claimant had not exhausted other possibilities or processes before resigning, or that there had not been an action so severe a breach to merit resigning.

Employment tribunals are not easy on litigants - even represented ones. For a litigant in person, the tribunal will make the process as understandable as possible, but they won't help them to present their case, so in complex cases like this, the litigant needs to have a clear idea of what they are trying to prove. Even if your case is good, poor presentation of facts can mean that the tribunal do not perceive your argument. It isn't up to them to decide which story they like best, but to balance the facts.

The biggest mistake that people make is assuming what the law says. I hear many tales of biased tribunals, but very seldom do the takes bear much examination. Litigants are all too often bound up in their own view of what the world should be like, and what they think it's fair or not. The law had no regard for such things. What is fair is what the law says is fair. And that is the end of the discussion.

A clear and level head is required. And bear in mind that many offers of settlement are made immediately before tribunals. Never assume that these are a confirmation that you have a good case or they are scared you will win. That might be the case, but more often than not, at this stage they are economic settlements - it's cheaper to settle than to pay legal fees for the case. And a bird in the hand is often worth two in the bush - tribunals can be lost, and they also award winners much, much less than they think they are going to get. Headlines about massive wins are headlines because they are unusual. The amount most people won is actually very little in comparison. Average awards are around the £6-7k mark.

IAmWales wrote: »

Masomnia makes a good point, threads like these tend to result in certain posters patronising you (already evidenced) followed by others piling in just to have a dig.

From your other thread the legal advice taken suggests you do have a case, and your employer has continually ignored any attempt at mediation or settlement. Do you have any further questions on your case? If you need any disability adjustments for the hearing be sure to give good notice to the tribunal.

Where has the OP been patronised already?

1) A witness statement is a statement of fact. It is what you witnessed. Nothing else. Points of applicable law are your argument - setting out your case through the process and in conclusion. The barrister acting for them probably knows the applicable law by heart anyway! And then some.

2) In all situations you tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. This is a court of law!

3) There are no longer set rules, but my advice is case reference in the header; page number in the footer, 1.5 lines spacing at a clear 12 pt font. They don't want to hear your life story. They want to hear only relevant facts about what happened in your employment that led to this claim.

4) It is never polite to interrupt a judge - or anyone else, including witnesses - in a court of law. You wait until the end of what they are saying. They will only clarify points of process - nothing else. If you have never even attended a tribunal you need to get yourself along to one or two and watch them. They are open to the public.

5) It can vary, but assume 9 - about 4pm. Lengths of day vary according to areas, cases, commitments, and "natural breaks" (like one side completing their evidence and the other not having enough time left to start properly.

6) You definitely need to go to some tribunals! It is rare for tribunals to hear written evidence at all now - they read it in advance to speed things up. You present your case in full - opening arguments, all witnesses (including yourself) and summation of your argument. Then they do the same, and finally you will both have a chance to make your final points, or rebut argument.

7) Yes they are allowed to do that. A statement of fact is not a threat. Costs orders are not common - but they are becoming more so recently, and increasingly against claimants (which was previously very exceptional).