Silent majority

Witness statements in employment tribunals should only be read aloud in exceptional circumstances, argues Mark Conway

14 Feb 2011

A recent EAT decision, Mehta v CSA [2010] UKEAT/127/10, points the way to a long overdue change in employment tribunal practice; namely that where an order has been made for the exchange of witness statements those statements should routinely stand as the evidence-in-chief of witnesses, and that in all regions, not just some, the reading out of a witness statement should become exceptional.

The claimant was unrepresented in an unfair dismissal case listed for two days. At the end of a slow first day in which two of the respondent’s three witnesses had read their statements aloud, the employment judge obtained the consent of the parties for the tribunal to read for themselves the statement of the respondent’s third witness ...

Want to read on?

This article is part of our subscription-based access. Please pick one of the options below to continue.
Already registered? Login to access premium content

Single User

  • - 10 issues a year delivered to you
  • - Digital edition of the magazine
  • - Access to premium content
  • - Access to the SJ Archives
  • - Weekly email newsletter
  • - Access to the SJ community online
  • - Advanced search feature
  • - Online support
  • - Access to SJ app- coming soon!
  • - 6 special focuses per year
  • - Special offers on SJ and IICJ events

Corporate User

The Corporate IP Licence is tailored to your firm, making it the most cost effective way for the firm to access Solicitors Journal, and enables the firm to remain compliant with copyright and our Terms and Conditions. This gives you the ability to print and circulate articles within the firm.

To enquire about a Corporate IP Licence for your firm, please contact our Subscriptions Manager on