Skorupski's Law

The employment tribunal

On 29 May 2002 the author of these pages submitted his resignation to the University of St Andrews and immediately filed for constructive dismissal at the Employment Tribunals in Edinburgh through the solicitors who represent the Association of University Teachers (AUT). He was advised by these solicitors that it might take until December 2002 to have the case heard.

In fact the case opened, following two Hearings on Directions six months apart, on 26 May 2003 and concluded on 18 May 2004 after more than four weeks' hearings spread over almost a year. The ruling of the Employment Tribunals, after further unusual delays, was sent out on 15 September 2004. The ruling was that the author's application had not been successful and that reasons for the ruling would be provided in due course. The full Judgment (with reasons) was finally sent out to the parties on 19 January 2005.

The Judgment, though 78 pages long, fails to make any reference to the evidence given by those witnesses the author called in his support — bar a single comment, which is used against the author. This is in spite of the fact that these witnesses were in the witness stand for most of two days. A great deal of other significant evidence is also missing from the judgment.

Apart from the omission of large amounts of key evidence, the judgment also contains systematic distortion of evidence, invention of evidence, and tendentious and perverse conclusions. To see the judgment click on Judgment. To see just why the judgment is intensely problematic, click on A Deeply Flawed Judgment.

The author

**********

Skorupski's Law: "The more vain one's ambition, the more redundant one's grasp of morality"