In court for breach of contract

embob74

My ex-employer is taking me to court for breach of contract and I wondered if anybody has any advice please.
I have handed the defence form in giving reasons why I believe they breached the contract due to loss of trust and confidence and stating they had not actually incurred any additional losses as only had to pay staff wages they would have had to pay me. They then changed their story to say they had to pay a trainer to be with the new employee for 4 shifts. I argued I only had 2 supervised shifts when I started and a relative of mine was only given 1 supervised shift when they started so not sure why this employee needed 4 supervised shifts.
Handed in my form to the court and was asked if I had sent a copy of my notes to the claimant and I said no (ticked NO on the form also) but the court admin said I would need to send it to them.
But I haven't - mainly because I don't want to give them my defence and watch them change their story again.
What are the chances the judge will disallow my defence due to the claimant not having received it?

skintandscared_2

It is part of the legal process for plaintiffs and defendants to serve each other claims, defences, counterclaims, etc, etc, before the trial date. Unfortunately you can't just turn up in court and say "ta daaa!" and produce your arguments. The other side need time to consider it, otherwise it's not fair. It works both ways - you are entitled to see everything they will be producing in court beforehand, so there shouldn't be any nasty surprises!

stebiz

You seriously need to think this through. This really is basic legal stuff, and if you can't get it right at this stage, any Solicitor/Barrister will wipe your backside good style when you get to court. I have defended myself and claimed through the court process, dozens of times. It isn't hard but it does require some reading. Good luck!!

SarEl

I am afraid I agree. What you or your relative required is not relevant evidence. Refuse to comply with court orders and you will live to regret it. This court is not quite as understanding as a tribunal - they can and will deal with you decisively and not very pleasantly. You need to do as you are told.

Notmyrealname

SarEl will correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it, if you don't give the other party the evidence or notes, you can't use it in court.

SarEl

Notmyrealname wrote: »

SarEl will correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it, if you don't give the other party the evidence or notes, you can't use it in court.

I believe that is correct - that is the usual procedure in courts. But this isn't one of "my" courts, so I can only comment on what is generally considered normal court practice. However, if all the OP has as evidence is that they didn't require 4 training sessions and neither did their relative, then I'm afraid they haven't exactly got much in the way of evidence. OP had better hope they have no evidence that they paid a trainer for four sessions.

On an interesting side note - anyone else noticing that employers are getting far more keen to sue employees who don't work their notice?

Notmyrealname

Indeed. I find the comments from people who say "they could sue you but nobody does so you'll be OK" quite irritating.

DVardysShadow

embob74 wrote: »

.... They then changed their story to say they had to pay a trainer to be with the new employee for 4 shifts. I argued I only had 2 supervised shifts when I started and a relative of mine was only given 1 supervised shift when they started so not sure why this employee needed 4 supervised shifts.

A better argument would be that the new employee would have required training anyway, so the cost of training arises from the termination of the contract rather than from the breach of contract. Your former employer would need to show that a temp was taken on and monitored to cover the period of the breach. They would also need to show that the permanent replacement was brought in and trained fairly shortly after the end of what would have been the normal notice period [or did not need training due to previous experience]. Otherwise the cost is attributable to the ending of the contract, rather than the breach.

You need to give your notes as part of the discovery process, as has already been explained. You also need to use the discovery process yourself. Part of the art is to look at the case the other side needs to make and gain all their material with the hope of getting hold of things which undermine their arguments.

scheming_gypsy

embob74 wrote: »

They then changed their story to say they had to pay a trainer to be with the new employee for 4 shifts. I argued I only had 2 supervised shifts when I started and a relative of mine was only given 1 supervised shift when they started so not sure why this employee needed 4 supervised shifts.

wouldn't it have been better to have argued that each new starter has a trainer on supervised shifts. So regardless of you working your notice or not, your replacement would have needed the same level of training?

planning303

When we're referring to the "trainer" do we just mean a ful trained member of staff coaching the trainee?

As wouldn't the counter arguement by the company be, that the worker who failed to work their notice would have supervised the trainee for the required amount of shifts (deemed nessecery by the speed inwhich they picked the job up)...

By the OP not working their notice and therefore not giving a complete hand over an additional member of staff has potentialy had to work O/T in order to complete their day to day job AND train the new starter?

(obviously lots of assumptions made)

scheming_gypsy

Possibly, but they said 'trainer' which (to me) suggests that it isn't just shadowing but a dedicated trainer. You know what it's like though on't tinterweb; everybody reads things differently.