| The Tribunals |
|
Chairman John Warren of Industrial Tribunal (IT): |
| At the hearing
on 9 February 1997, Mr.Warren was sitting alone. He was both conducting the case as well
as taking notes. There were four persons present on behalf of PW, i.e., Mr. Bell, Mr.
Macleod, Ms. Karen Birch (in house solicitor of PW who was taking extensive notes and Ms.
Susan Jane-Davies – Solicitor from Eversheds acting on behalf of PW. Mr. Tim Williams
was also present acting as an observer. I conducted the case in person. Mr. Warren did not
allow me to record the proceedings on my tape recorder. |
| Mr. Warren
constantly interrupted me.
After the hearing, he decided that the ‘date of Incident’ of discriminatory act
did not fall within 3 three months of my complaint against PW. According to his decision
at the end of hearing, he ruled that my complaint was 10-12 days too late. Mr. Warren was
in a position to use his discretion about the ‘date of incident’ in law but did
not do so. He believed in the prepared statements of PW executives rather than the daily
notes of my telephone conversations with PW staff members. |
| I was the last
one to leave the hearing room as I was collecting my papers. Mr. Warren looked red faced
and embarrassed with both hands clasped as I looked into his eyes. |
| Later Mr.
Williams wrote, " The Chairman hearing the case appeared to me be biased
against Mr. Malhotra as he often interrupted him to dislodge flow of his thought (As he
was presenting and arguing the case himself). I realized within 10 minutes that the
decision would go against Mr. Malhotra". This letter was sent as an affidavit in my
appeal against Warren’s decision. |
| I appealed the
decision of Mr. Warren on grounds of bias, deliberately interrupting me, not using his
discretion, and other matters. |
Statement
Mr. Warren wrote
to the Registrar of Employment Appeal Tribunal on 21 May 1998 that, "
I did not interrupt him to stop him from telling me things which were of absolutely no
consequence especially with regard to his background with East European Secret
Services." Back |
| Judge H J
Byrt QC (Chairman), Mr. I Ezekiel and Mr. D J Jenkins of Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT):
Hearing held on 7 October 1998 |
| Judge Byrt found
the underlined statement (in bold and italics above) made by Chairman John Warren about me as very serious. He wanted
affidavit from me and response from Warren. Thus the hearing was postponed to a later
date. |
| Even the PW in
house solicitor had no record that I ever said anything about my background about East
European Secret Services. Mr. Williams also confirmed this in writing to EAT. I never
had any relationship with such services. This only existed in Warren's imagination. |
| John Warren was not only biased against me but he was also hard of
hearing. |
| Finally, the case
was heard by Mr. Justice Charles (Chairman), Miss D Whittingham and Mr. N D
Willis (now Lord Willis) of EAT on 17 June 1999. They produced a reserve
Judgment and then delivered their verdict on 29 July 1999 supporting PW about the
‘date of Incidence’ of PW’s discriminatory act. Justice Charles produced a
report of 28 pages in his final judgment with arguments about ‘date of
Incidence’ supporting Chairman Warren. |
| During the
hearing I asked the judge to give me his definition of bias and whether he as a white man
has ever faced discrimination. He could not answer this question and quoted another white
judge on the definition of bias. |
| I decided not to
appeal against their judgment for obvious reasons as I was not going to get anywhere
against these closely knit and conditioned people who simply play with words and lack
common sense. |
| Introduction
| Brief Facts and History |
| PW and its Executives | Tribunals |
|
Conclusions | Contact Us | |