®




Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: The Faletto Case Is Going To Tribunal

  1. #1
    tshanazt
    Guest tshanazt's Avatar

    Default The Faletto Case Is Going To Tribunal

    On Sep 21, 6:11.pm, "Tim Fenton" <timfen...@...............> wrote:
    > Apparently it will be heard in Southampton on November 1:


    I'd always imagined that there had to be a rather shorter timescale
    than this between dismissal and any subsequent industrial tribunal.
    Clearly not so.

    --
    gordon

  2. #2
    Owain
    Guest Owain's Avatar

    Default The Faletto Case Is Going To Tribunal

    On Sep 21, 7:05.pm, "tshan...@........" wrote:
    > > Apparently it will be heard in Southampton on November 1:

    > I'd always imagined that there had to be a rather shorter timescale
    > than this between dismissal and any subsequent industrial tribunal.
    > Clearly not so.


    I think employees can initiate tribunal proceedings up to 3 months (in
    some cases later) after exhausting internal procedures. This takes
    into account the time it takes to get pre-tribunal disclosure of
    information etc.

    So that could be c. late August for the initial tribunal submission,
    to-ing and fro-ing by lawyers could easily take another couple of
    months as well as waiting for a tribunal panel to be available.

    Owain

  3. #3
    Phil
    Guest Phil's Avatar

    Default The Faletto Case Is Going To Tribunal

    On 21/09/11 19:05, tshanazt@........ wrote:
    > On Sep 21, 6:11 pm, "Tim Fenton"<timfen...@...............> wrote:
    >> Apparently it will be heard in Southampton on November 1:

    >
    > I'd always imagined that there had to be a rather shorter timescale
    > than this between dismissal and any subsequent industrial tribunal.
    > Clearly not so.


    My court date was set for fourteen months after I got the boot. The
    wheels of justice grind slow...

    --
    Phil
    Liverpool, UK

  4. #4
    news.virginmedia.com
    Guest news.virginmedia.com's Avatar

    Default The Faletto Case Is Going To Tribunal

    "Mizter T" <mizter.t@..........> wrote in message
    news:j5f6vb$5ta$1@dont-email.me...
    >>
    >>
    >> I am wondering why there is something strange about the story ( written
    >> by Azphreal ) and what made RedhillPhil say he is conniving lying
    >> fantasist.
    >> Does anyone have more info

    >
    > I suggest as a general rule that it might be somewhat unwise to have such
    > discussions whilst legal action is ongoing.

    Point taken

    I will hope that it is followed up by the Bournemouth echo or another paper
    though.
    When I worked on the railway there was a few steps before dismissal e.g.
    verbal warning, written warning, final written warning etc so to do one
    wrong thing and get the sack seams to be rather unfair to me, if thats the
    only thing he has done wrong but obviousley I don't know the facts etc so I
    am keen on knowing whats what.
    Simon G

  5. #5
    ian batten
    Guest ian batten's Avatar

    Default The Faletto Case Is Going To Tribunal

    On Sep 22, 1:16.pm, "news.virginmedia.com" <s...@invalid.invalid>
    wrote:
    > "Mizter T" <mizte...@..........> wrote in message
    >
    > n
    > > I suggest as a general rule that it might be somewhat unwise to have such
    > > discussions whilst legal action is ongoing.

    >
    > Point taken
    >
    > I will hope that it is followed up by the Bournemouth echo or another paper
    > though.


    The Bournemouth Echo have left those comments up since Tuesday, so
    they presumably think the chances of it being deemed contempt of court
    are close to zero. ETs don't have juries, and (contrary to the belief
    of people who believe that the mere act of contemplating a legal
    action makes all discussion potentially contemptuous, and use writs
    for that purpose) the test for contempt of course is "substantial risk
    that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be
    seriously impeded or prejudiced." When there's no jury involved, the
    barrier for that is incredibly high: the discussion would have to be
    of a nature such that there was a serious risk of it affecting the
    judgement of a professional member of the ET.

    In the Aishah Azmi case, the Prime Minister personally said that her
    sacking was justified while the tribunal was still sitting, and that
    didn't result in a contempt action (although the ET got a bit lippy
    about it). If someone knows some incredibly prejudicial fact about
    Faletto which has for some reason been kept from the panel, then it's
    risky to publish it; anything below that line is unlikely to be a
    problem. Tribunal panels, unlike juries, are assumed to be able to
    keep evidence and things from the papers separate. Remember the
    test: "substantial risk...course of justice...seriously impeded or
    prejudiced". Comments on a local paper wouldn't qualify.

    ian

  6. #6
    Ross-a-travelling
    Guest Ross-a-travelling's Avatar

    Default The Faletto Case Is Going To Tribunal

    On Sep 22, 1:16.pm, "news.virginmedia.com" <s...@invalid.invalid>
    wrote:
    [...]
    > When I worked on the railway there was a few steps before dismissal e.g.
    > verbal warning, written warning, final written warning etc so to do one
    > wrong thing and get the sack seams to be rather unfair to me, if thats the
    > only thing he has done wrong but obviousley I don't know the facts etc so i
    > am keen on knowing whats what.


    Nothing's changed since your time on the railway, apart from a general
    willingness to assume that the nasty company has sacked him for a
    first offence.

    Clause 9's still exist, of course, but I rather doubt this is the sort
    of incident a Clause 9 would have been used for had it been a first
    offence.

    R.
    (who is NOT employed by SWT, even though the uniform he wears is
    almost identical)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •