More women accuse Leeds employment tribunal judge of bullying

Three extra girls have accused a choose of bullying throughout employment tribunal hearings.

They are saying Choose Philip Lancaster was belittling and intimidating and made them really feel silly whereas they introduced their circumstances. One stated she felt his behaviour in her case verged on psychological abuse.

The three girls have spoken out following a BBC report in April during which 5 girls accused Mr Lancaster of bullying and sexist behaviour.

A spokesperson for the Judiciary Workplace, which helps the judiciary throughout courts in England and Wales, stated judges can not touch upon issues of conduct as a consequence of constitutional preparations.

It stated allegations of misconduct in courtroom may be referred to the Judicial Conduct Investigation Workplace.

The three girls all appeared earlier than Choose Lancaster on the employment tribunal in Leeds between 2021 and this 12 months.

In October 2022, Jackie Moore represented her daughter who had introduced a case of constructive unfair dismissal and incapacity discrimination in opposition to her employer.

Ms Moore had spent two years making ready the case and had a lot of preliminary hearings earlier than completely different judges who she discovered “environment friendly and well mannered.”

Nevertheless, she says none of that ready her for the complete five-day listening to she had earlier than Choose Lancaster. She says he was “patronising” proper from the beginning.

“He thought I wouldn’t have a clue.”

Ms Moore stated the choose repeatedly snapped at her and “blocked or challenged” the questions she was asking the witnesses supplied by her daughter’s employer.

She says she felt “battered, intimidated and bullied by him, throwing his weight about”.

When she learn the accounts by different girls who had appeared earlier than the choose she realised she was not alone.

Employment tribunals are specialist courts that rule on disputes between employers and workers. There are about 30,000 hearings in Scotland, England and Wales yearly, primarily involving points reminiscent of unfair dismissal, redundancy phrases and discrimination. Northern Eire has a separate system.

In April BBC Information heard allegations from 5 different girls about Choose Lancaster’s behaviour. The ladies, who encountered him in separate circumstances, stated they wished to spotlight his “degrading behaviour”, together with what they stated was “misogyny and bullying”.

Earlier this 12 months, one other lady spent seven days in a listening to earlier than Choose Lancaster, having introduced a case of age discrimination, constructive dismissal and unfair discrimination in opposition to her employer.

The lady, who needs to stay nameless, says she felt “totally ready” as she had spent effectively over a 12 months engaged on her case, even attending different hearings in Leeds to see how litigants-in-person – individuals who signify themselves – had been handled.

Once more, she says her preliminary hearings had gone effectively. “Everybody allowed me to speak, no person shut me down, no person made me really feel ineffective.”

That have, says the 45-year-old, was in direct distinction to how she was handled by Choose Lancaster.

“He made my life hell,” she remembers. “He’d put his arms on his head, and appeared disinterested in what I used to be saying. He repeatedly requested why I used to be asking [my employer’s witnesses] specific questions and raised his voice quite a few occasions. I felt ineffective.” She is now interesting the ruling.

Angela Gates introduced a case of incapacity discrimination and constructive dismissal in opposition to her employer in 2021.

She says a listening to in entrance of Choose Lancaster made her really feel “like a villain being prosecuted”.

She says: “I felt I couldn’t give my facet on something.”

The four-day listening to was held on Zoom, and Ms Gates, 53, says Choose Lancaster commonly shouted at her, repeatedly telling her to be quiet. She says his behaviour was “appalling and degrading, verging on psychological abuse”, including: “I don’t consider I’ve been given a good trial.”

In his judgement, the choose stated he agreed with the defence’s description of Ms Gates as “tipping into paranoia”, saying this was not a criticism of her however “a truth, given her poor psychological well being”. Ms Gates says she discovered this grossly offensive.

“He has no medical coaching to succeed in that conclusion,” she says.

She appealed the judgement however didn’t complain about Choose Lancaster’s behaviour as, like many different litigants, “you’re advised to not complain on the grounds of bias”.

“You’re feeling it’ll have an effect on your case for those who get private a couple of choose.”

A spokesperson for the Judiciary Workplace stated appeals may be lodged in opposition to any judgement the place a celebration believes there’s an error of legislation or they didn’t obtain a good listening to.

However bringing a criticism in opposition to a choose within the employment tribunal system is extraordinarily tough. Choose’s notes are thought to be the official courtroom file however there isn’t a obligation to launch them. Since late final 12 months, proceedings in some tribunals have been recorded however there’s additionally no obligation on the courtroom to launch the audio or present the claimants with a transcript.

One of many girls who initially complained about Choose Lancaster’s behaviour, Alison McDermott, believes the judicial system is completely unaccountable.

“I’m fed up with this nonsense, the dearth of transparency and equity in a courtroom of legislation within the UK,” she stated. “The entire system is in pressing want of a complete investigation.”