The ET judged that it was unlikely that a fair trial could be held if the employer took part in the proceedings.
The employer appealed to the EAT, which upheld the ET’s decision.
This article is based on public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v2.0.
Section 51 is concerned with the protection of persons who are involved with criminal, as opposed to civil, investigations and/or trials.
The section is not concerned with protecting evidence from being tampered with or fabricated, which may amount to the offence of perverting the course of justice, or one of the other statutory alternatives relating to written or other forms of evidence, referred to elsewhere in this Charging Standard.
"Under this legislation the judge must be satisfied that there is 'evidence' of a real and present danger that jury tampering will occur and that, despite precautionary steps such as police protection, there remains a 'substantial' likelihood of jury tampering making it necessary in the interest of justice for the trial to be conducted without a jury.
"This includes the safeguards of judicial oversight, high objective thresholds and consideration of alternative precautionary steps which are all built into the legislation.
The Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2004 set out the normal rules for Tribunal proceedings.
Employment Judges have the power, under Rule 18(7)(c), to strike out any claim or response on the grounds that ‘the manner in which the proceedings have been conducted by or on behalf of the claimant or the respondent…has been scandalous, unreasonable or vexatious’.
The British government disclosed details of its exchanges with members of the criminal justice system as it considered extending the practice for another two years.
Dissident republicans pose a severe threat in Northern Ireland and the security forces are on high alert for more attacks.
It expressed concern that reliance on a law like that used in England and Wales alone would prove inadequate for the unique situation in Northern Ireland.
Adam Law Solicitors offer expert legal advice for anyone facing, or worried about facing, prosecution for Intimidating or Harming Witnesses and Others.
A person commits an offence contrary to s.51(1) when doing to another person: If a person does an act which intimidates another with the requisite knowledge or belief then he is presumed to have done so with the necessary intent unless the contrary is proved (s.51(7)).