Forum Home» Employment, Jobseeking & Training

Employment Tribunal- Respondent did not comply with specific disclosure

New Post Advanced Search

Employment Tribunal- Respondent did not comply with specific disclosure

9 replies 515 views
Hi All,
Have seen loads of great advice and support here so thought I'd try my luck. 
I'm taking a company to Tribunal for discrimination. At the preliminary hearing, the Judge ordered specific disclosure for all ethnic minority employees that had been dismissed over the last three years. The Respondent's sent an email to the tribunal indicating that no ethnic minority employees had been dismissed in 2017 or 2018. However, I knew for a fact that two ethnic minority employees had been dismissed. I reached out to them and sent their statements (where they confirm that they were indeed fired) to the tribunal. I  wrote "I contend that by not making this information available as part of specific disclosure the Respondent has acted scandalously and unreasonably intending to weaken my claims of discrimination, harassment and victimisation. They have failed to comply honestly with the Tribunal Order."
The tribunal emailed me back asking if I wanted them to act on this information and I applied to strike out the Respondent's response because a fundamental loss of trust had occurred.
The Respondent has emailed back today saying they object and that I don't have any grounds to apply for their defence to be struck out. I'm worried that I've made an idiot of myself and that this could affect my standing with the tribunal. Did I do the wrong thing?

Thanks for reading!

Replies

  • camelot1971camelot1971 Forumite
    1.4K posts
    Ninth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭
    Why are you abusing the Tribunal system by "trying your luck"?
  • sharpe106sharpe106 Forumite
    3.5K posts
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    ✭✭✭✭
    Why would it affect your standing with the tribunal? They would never have know that the company had lied in the response. So surely it is a good thing and shows that your old company can't be trusted.  


  • MatthewRebMatthewReb Forumite
    6 posts
    First Post
    sharpe106 said:
    Why would it affect your standing with the tribunal? They would never have know that the company had lied in the response. So surely it is a good thing and shows that your old company can't be trusted.  


    Hi Sharp,

    You were totally on the money here. The judge said that, while the irregularity was not severe enough to merit having the respondent defence struck out, I had every right to pursue my case and that I had clearly acted in good faith. They have ordered specific disclosure around the individuals alluded to. 
    Many thanks for your kind advice 
    Matt 
  • MatthewRebMatthewReb Forumite
    6 posts
    First Post
    Masomnia said:
    Why are you abusing the Tribunal system by "trying your luck"?
    Pretty clear that they mean trying their luck by posting here.
    Thank you for your support 
  • MatthewRebMatthewReb Forumite
    6 posts
    First Post
    Why are you abusing the Tribunal system by "trying your luck"?
    I’m afraid you’ve gotten the wrong end of the stick here Camelot. Won’t go into too much detail but rest assured going to tribunal is not something I undertook on a whim. 
  • NothanksNothanks Forumite
    160 posts
    Ninth Anniversary 100 Posts Combo Breaker
    They can object all they want, in my experience if an ET judge thinks someone is telling them porkies they are far from impressed. In my opinion you defo did the right thing assuming the two individuals circumstances do support your claim.
    Union official.
    CiPD qualified.

    Anything I post is solely MY OPINION. It never constitutes legal, financial or collective bargaining advice. I may tell you based on information given how I might approach an employment dispute case, but you should always seek advice from your own Union representative. If you don't have one, get one!
  • steampoweredsteampowered Forumite
    4.9K posts
    Seventh Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    ✭✭✭✭
    Failing to comply with an order for specific disclosure is grounds to apply for a strike-out.

    That's not to say the ET will necessarily grant the strike-out, and of course the respondent will object, but I don't think you've made an idiot of yourself. Don't ask don't get.
  • edited 23 July at 10:48AM
    MatthewRebMatthewReb Forumite
    6 posts
    First Post
    edited 23 July at 10:48AM
    Failing to comply with an order for specific disclosure is grounds to apply for a strike-out.

    That's not to say the ET will necessarily grant the strike-out, and of course the respondent will object, but I don't think you've made an idiot of yourself. Don't ask don't get.
    “Don’t ask don’t get” seems to be the key phrase tbh. I think people generally get nervous by how formal the solicitor and judges are acting. But you must must make it clear what you’re after and even if they say no there’s no harm in having asked. Squeaky gear gets the oil
Sign In or Register to comment.

Quick links

Essential Money | Who & Where are you? | Work & Benefits | Household and travel | Shopping & Freebies | About MSE | The MoneySavers Arms | Covid-19 & Coronavirus Support