header-logo header-logo

Strike out the bullies

10 July 2008 / Sarah Fitzpatrick , Elisabeth Griffiths
Issue: 7329 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail

Those who intimidate witnesses at employment tribunal proceedings could face serious consequences. Sarah Fitzpatrick and Elisabeth Griffiths report

Two recent cases in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) have explored the issue of intimidation of witnesses at employment tribunal proceedings and the consequences of such action. These cases make it clear that the potential consequences are very serious and include the possibility that the offending party's pleadings could be struck out and that any intimidatory conduct could give rise to a further cause of action for the claimant.

Force One Utilities v Hatfield

In Force One Utilities Ltd v Hatfield UKEAT/0048/08, [2008] All ER (D) 130 (May) the claimant, Hatfield, presented a claim for unfair dismissal against the respondent, his ex-employer, Force One Utilities Ltd. Hatfield represented himself at the employment tribunal hearing. It came to light at the hearing in April 2007 that a key witness for the respondent, a Mr Shuter, had made a serious threat of physical harm to Hatfield. Shuter said that Hatfield should “watch how you sleep

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
Transferring anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorism financing supervision to the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) could create extra paperwork and increase costs for clients, lawyers have warned 
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
As he steps down as Chancellor of the High Court, Sir Julian Flaux reflects on over 40 years in law, citing independence, impartiality and integrity as guiding principles. In a special interview with Grania Langdon-Down for NLJ, Sir Julian highlights morale, mentorship and openness as key to a thriving judiciary
Dinsdale v Fowell is a High Court case entangling bigamy, intestacy and modern family structures, examined in this week's NLJ by Shivi Rajput of Stowe Family Law
back-to-top-scroll