When you get to this stage of dealing with the actual Employment Tribunal, the atmosphere changes. It’s not that the staff and the judges are unfriendly, on the contrary, I’ve found them all extremely helpful—and even the legal representatives of the other Party have been very civil, mostly. It’s just that everything is so formal. You get emails with attached letters that, below the addresses, reference numbers and names of Claimant and Respondent, start like this:
Dear Sir/Madam
Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
I refer to the above-named proceedings in which correspondence from the claimant
was referred to Legal Officer [NAME] who directed that I write as follows:
And emails, with the case name and number in the subject header, that start like this:
Dear Sir/Madam
I refer to the above-named proceedings in which I act on behalf of the Respondent
and to the Tribunal’s letter of [DATE] in relation with the Claimant’s request of [DATE] for [WHATEVER].
Another big difference between the ET and ACAS is that there are so many forms! with ACAS there are only three that I’ve had to deal with:
- COT1—my claim form
- COT2—their resistance to my claim
- COT3—the proposed settlement
The CO, I presume, stands for conciliation – as the ACAS process is known as early conciliation – but I don’t know what the T stands for. The COT1 is important as writing it helps you as Claimant to edit what may be a complex and emotional narrative of events into a more succinct and objective legal document (not easy!) and it also lets the other Party know what claims they are dealing with. The COT2 is helpful, as it let’s you know what the other side are attempting to contest—so look for the differences between the two forms: what claims do they not mention? Gaps may indicate claims, or parts of claims, that they accept.
ACAS tends to focus on the COT3 because they’re all about trying to find agreement between the Parties.
With the ET, the only form that I had a template for was the ET1—my initial claim. After that, I either had to create documents myself (be prepared for a lot of looking things up online) or adapt something sent by the other Party.
Now, part of professional courtesy, especially for a lawyer (and as a party litigant—even though you’re neither a solicitor or a barrister/ advocate—that’s what you are) Is to recognise that people are simply doing their jobs. So a paranoid mentality of ‘these are evil people and they’re out to get me’ is not only inaccurate but unhelpful.
The Employment Tribunal is very definitely not out to get you. They really don’t care who wins a case as long as the Parties and their legal representatives abide by law and by ET procedures. That’s good. You really don’t want them caring about one side or the other but, as I’ve said, I do find them to be incredibly helpful – in fact had to be told, politely, to stop thanking ET staff by name.
Opposing counsel is also not out to get you, not really. They’re literally just doing their job: which is to resist your claims. So try not to take it personally. Remember that these are people working in the legal profession who sacrificed time and effort to study and further their career, and they most probably did it with some vision in mind of making the world a better place. So don’t demonise them. In fact, on three separate occasions they’ve done me a favour:
The first is when I printed out a whole bunch of forms to hand into their offices (there was an ongoing dispute about data protection and use of my private email at the time, so I was printing everything out, which was time-consuming and expensive). A well-dressed young man, getting into the lift when I was getting out, answered my enquiry about how to deliver these forms to the solicitor with a smile and an offer to do it for me. Which he did. I think he was a partner of the firm.
An associate of the same firm made a very good initial draft of issues. I literally wouldn’t have known where to start, and I said that when I thanked her in an email to them (temporarily granting use of my personal email to the firm but not to the Respondent). And then I redrafted it and filled in all the gaps that she’d left out. They may be civil, but you’ve got to watch them.
An advocate (that’s a Scottish barrister) of the firm told me that I needed to work on my claims. He was right, and I thanked him. Even though he clearly hadn’t read the brief and was rather petulant about the complexity of the case. Now, to be honest, the repetition of this “we don’t understand what you’re claiming” excuse is proving to be rather tiresome and, as I told ET recently, is really unacceptable given that I have complied with every request for clarification, in detail, despite the other Party withholding information (and my P45 and P60s, after a year). The overarching obligation of the ET is to put both Parties on an equal footing.
I’ve mentioned some of the key documents already, here’s a list of all the types I’ve had to deal with or create (sometimes more than once):
- ET1 – my initial claim
- Grounds of Resistance
- Claimant’s Agenda
- Respondent’s Agenda
- List of Issues
- Summary of Events
- Skeleton Argument
- Further and Better Particulars
- Request for Information and Documentation
As well as these documents there are also multiple legal actions taking place in emails and letters, such as Request for Strike-out, Application to Amend Claim, and Notice of Preliminary Hearing and Note after Preliminary Hearing – and the same two for Judicial Mediation.
So a top tip is to be really organised. Opposing counsel as all the facilities of a legal firm to work with, you don’t. So you need to download every email you get from them and save it in a clearly labelled folder, and do the same with posted letters and other documents. As a party litigant, the Ace up your sleeve is that you know the facts of the case better than anyone else—however you also have to keep your eye on the ball once the game of legal procedures starts because you’re opposed by people who are trained to be pedantic and the devil is very definitely in the details!
I know I said that I’d be discussing Preliminary Hearings and Judicial Mediation next but I felt the general introduction to the ET needed to proceed that.
(This post is part of a series)
Thanks to Mohamed Mahmoud Hassan for releasing his image Lady Justice Silhouette into the Public Domain.
alchemicalquality 