UK Employment Tribunal Watford corrupted

Whistleblowing claim investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority: Result that a group of oil companies ( BRITISH PETROLEUM  -Total-Texaco and Kuwait Petroleum) fueling aircrafts at Heathrow Airport has violated the obligations of health and safety, placing millions of passengers in danger.

An employment corrupted Judge (Stephen Vowles from Watford /Reading Employment Tribunals) shamefully strikes out the claimant’s claim under rule 37, To Protect the respondent’s reputation.

Full Public story link http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html

How Corporations influence the Justice  and politicians

Watch the video

Letter to Prime Minister Theresa May 2018

 

 

The  disabled Claimant  sent a formal complaint of judicial conduct (Under Tribunal Rule 2014)to the Employment Tribunals President (Judge Brian Doyle)He  answers:

I am afraid that I must now draw a line under this correspondence.I intend you no discourtesy by so doing.Further correspondence from you on these same matters will be filed without acknowledgment or reply.


Link click here Aviation fuel Services LTD accuses his employee of being a Terrorist and Rapist   at London Heathrow Airport(unbelievable)

 


                                      Why Watford Employment Tribunal run by criminals        


                                        click here http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5xez2b


                                            


Claimant to Representatives of justice



The Ombudsman’s role is to conduct an investigation into the process by which the Tribunal Service handled the investigation into my complaint.  Whether it was conducted fairly and appropriately in accordance with set procedures. You and the unlawfully nominated REJ Byrne, have not even considered my complaint.


Where is the report of the outcome of the investigation handled by an investigating judge?  Therefore  what grounds do I have to contact the ombudsman?
1)The use of racist and violation against a disable person  human right  act 1998

2)General rudeness

3)Misusing judicial status for personal gain or advantage
4)Falsified the facts on outcome of decisions
This is the post made by the Employment tribunal in Watford . It is online (False of course)https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/mr-m-longbardi-v-aviation-fuel-services-ltd-3322804-2016

Health and safety at Heathrow Airport message to EASA FAA IATA & CAA

 
I’m temporarily living in Bologna ( Italy)  please contact me only longobardimatteo@gmail.com
The Employment Appeal Tribunal, Honorable Dishonest Judge   David Richardson
Employment’s Appeal tribunal president answer ( after watching my videos on youtube )

LONDONEAT <londoneat@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk>13 October 2017

Oct 13
to me

Dear Mr Longobardi

The EAT President is not able to determine from your Youtube videos what complaint you wish to make about His Honour Judge Richardson.

If you wish to pursue such a complaint about Judge Richardson, please set out your complaint in writing.

The President is only able to consider complaints about the conduct or behaviour of a judge, she cannot consider a complaint about a judicial decision.

Mark Harrington

Operational Support Manager
Employment Appeal Tribunal

 

The Claimant has appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal paying £400 fee.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal, Honorable Judge David Richardson has, after deliberating for three months, dismissed the Appeal. The Claimant is an expert in Employment and Aviation Law and therefore convinced that both the Employment Tribunal and Employment Appeal Tribunal are run by dishonest and cheating people.

The House of Commons has blocked my email address longobardimatteo@gmail.com

 

Correspondence with all authorities -SFO,NCA,CityLondon police.

total ignored.
When a person who represents justice and  misuses their judicial status for personal gain or advantage and Falsifies the facts -is a potential criminal-

Mrs Simler and Mr Justice Lidignton, They both seem to be still deaf and blind

These criminal judges have to go to jail.

Blog  http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html

Videos  http://www.dailymotion.com/safetyaviationworld2017

Matteo Longobardi

 

 

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

                              Message for Mr David LIDINGTON Lord of Justice

 

The Claimant has reported this injustice to the the present Government . NO REPLY.

Watch the video below

 

If You are a victim of  your Representatives or dishonest  Judges which are  open to get a gift from your employer (Do not hesitate to contact me  ) support this blog and share It-                                        I’m temporarily living in Bologna ( Italy)  please contact me only longobardimatteo@gmail.com

 

I studied  Employment and Aviation Law . I am creating a group for people who want to expose this puppet government’s cover up of the corruption that exists in the British Justice system, that was once considered to be the fairest in the free world. Justice is for the People and we want our voices heard.

                                                                                                                                                                        The Dishonest criminal Judge Vowles illegal outcome for profit   : Please see the                                 video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yM_Q4WzCuQ

 

Video

UK Justice System is a total deception wake up people

click here    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yM_Q4WzCuQ

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   On 11 June 2017, as part of a Cabinet reshuffle following the 2017 general election, Elisabeth Truss            was appointed Chief Secretary to  the Treasury.     A politician with no legal training and limited experience of the legal world becomes Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor

 

President Brian Doyle       London Central Employment Tribunals                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Victory House 30-

34                                                                                                                                                                 Kingsway                                                                                                                                                                                                           London                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               WC2B 6EX

Date: 07/06/2017

Mr M Longobardi v Aviation Fuel Services Ltd  Case Number :3322804/2016                                                                                                 Re: Complaint – Judicial misconduct

Dear President Doyle

Further to your e-mail sent to me today.  Having read your response to my complaint (and also the response from Regional Judge Byrne, who was not officially delegated to look into my complaint).

I followed yours and Regional Judge Byrne’s instruction to look at the website for Judicial Conduct and you will see yourself what the website says regarding such a complaint.  “Complaints about Tribunal Judges must be made to the relevant Chamber President”.

https://judicialconduct.judiciary.gov.uk/making-a-complaint/who-can-i-complain-about/

You should know that the Ombudsman’s role is to conduct an investigation into the process by which the Tribunal Service handled the investigation into my complaint.  Whether it was conducted fairly and appropriately in accordance with set procedures.

I have sent my complaint to you President Doyle, by email on 12 May 2017 and by letters dated 26 May 2017.

Please confirm to me, that you are rejecting the consideration of my complaint against members of Watford Employment Tribunal for judicial misconduct. Bearing in mind that Judge Vowles’ attitude towards me was racist, violating the human rights of a disabled person – the evidence of which is in my e-mail to you dated 12 May 2017.

I think you have possibly misunderstood the nature of my complaint, or you have chosen not to understand.  I therefore am explaining again to you what my complaint is about.

My ex-employer is a huge group of oil companies and globally believes it has the power to control everything.  I have brought several claims to the Employment Tribunal, including a Whistleblowing claim, where my ex employer has failed to to comply with Aviation Health and Safety obligations putting  in danger millions of passengers’ lives flying from Heathrow Airport, (confirmed by Civil Aviation Authority).  Employment Judge Vowles refused to discuss my Whistleblowing claim at the Preliminary Hearing on 29/09/16, therefore protecting my ex-employer and on 22/11/16, I received a letter from the ET stating that this particular claim was not included.  I had to insist on a further Preliminary Hearing to give my evidence.  I followed the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (ERRA) and I was finally given a date for another Preliminary Hearing on 14/03/17. The Employment Tribunal originally advised both parties on 09/02/17 that the Preliminary Hearing would take place in private (which would protect the Respondent’s reputation).  I had to remind the ET that hearings of this context in the UK are to be public.  At this point, the Employment Judge assisted the Respondent by ordering that they apply to strike out my Whistleblowing claim, in a letter to both parties, dated 22.02.17.

Judge Vowles  wrote  “ the Tribunal will also consider the Respondent’s application to strike out the claims on the grounds of unreasonable and vexatious conduct”.  I have always shown due respect towards the Tribunal and the Respondent.  In the words of Judge Vowles that my conduct was vexatious, this is rude and racist towards me, it is another humiliation against a disabled person, to strike me out at the Preliminary Hearing on 14/03/17.  The Judge also ordered the ET office to send me an ‘urgent’ e-mail with this e-mail address harvinder.panesar@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk  on 13/03/17 (also sent to the Respondent, the previous day to remind the Respondent, that he should strike out my claim). This amounts to conflict of interest, on behalf of my ex-employer.  Thus pushing the Respondent to fabricate an application to strike out my Whistleblowing claim – this was unfortunately not possible to do, as it has already been investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority.

Employment Judge Hill from the ET, Watford refused this application on 08/03/17, the content of which was contained false statement that did not confirm with the criteria of claim.  A letter followed dated 09/03/17 from ET Judge Vowles stating that ET Judge Hill’s letter sent to both parties, had been misquoted and the application to strike out had not been refused.

The Respondent has falsified claims in his application by stating that I have not complied with orders, I have clearly showed that I did comply with orders.  The Respondent has also included in his application threatening letters, as presented at the Preliminary Hearing on 14/03/17, without providing a statement of truth following Civil Procedure rules. This has shamefully resulted in EJ Vowles accusing me directly of sending such letters to the Respondent, without evidence and this influenced his decision.  At the Preliminary Hearing I pointed out many times that I made an application to strike out the Respondent for abuse of proceedings and vexatious conduct, especially producing false statement.  I also asked Judge Vowles to record the facts, at the Preliminary Hearing on 14/03/17 but he refused.  I advised the ET and the Respondent in my letter dated 28/10/16 that the Respondent had been making false statements and advised the other party to use a moderate tone and behaviour.

In addition, the Respondent has failed to comply with order and unless order date 5/12/16 and 11/01/17.  The Respondent has defaulted but the Employment Tribunal has continued to ignore this violation, (how could it be possible that no-one in the ET team dealing with this case did not pick up on this?) assisting the Respondent and in the assumption that the Claimant is ignorant and taking advantage of his disability.  I had no alternative but to apply for a statement of truth (Civil Procedure Rule 22.1) and ask the ET formally if the Respondent complied with order and unless order.

The Employment Tribunal has failed to give me a reply to this and I am still awaiting a response to my letter dated 12/04/17.  Employment Judge Vowles has chosen to strike me out in whole for reasons of conflict of interest and falsifying the facts.  I believe the reasons are based on the influence of my ex-employer (oil companies).

This is a disgraceful scenario and should not happen within the Justice system of this country.  You have access to all correspondence via the HMCTS database server recorder longobardimatteo@gmail.com and can verify that I am telling the Truth

Yours faithfully

Matteo Longobardi

 

 

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

President Brian Doyle                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           London Central Employment Tribunals                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Victory House 30-34                                                                                                                                                                     Kingsway                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                London                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   WC2B 6EX

Date: 12/06/2017

Mr M Longobardi v Aviation Fuel Services Ltd  Case Number :3322804/2016                                                                             Re: Justice system in the UK

President Doyle

Further to your e-mail sent to me on 12/06/2017.  Having read your response to my complaint, you are confirming that you defend the Watford Tribunal members, in addition you bypass The Judicial Conduct (Tribunals) Rules 2014, for your own convenience.  It is sadly disappointing.

II sent you (and only to you) my complaint, on 12 May 2017 but you ignored me and suddenly the REJ Byrne arises again with his megalomaniac letter dated 24/05/2017, informing me that being a Regional Employment Tribunal Judge, he has the power to be responsible for investigating complaint of judicial conduct in accordance with the provisions of conduct tribunal rule 2014.  This is gross misconduct.

  1. Where a complaint is referred to an investigating judge, the relevant President must inform the tribunal member concerned and the complainant accordingly.(With all respect I should probably have for a President of Employment Tribunals, although it seems to me that you think that I am a disabled idiot .Tell me, when exactly did you delegate the REJ Byrne to look into my complaint for an investigation? I was not informed and have not received any notification from you (with the exception of your letter dated 9 June 2017).

I am going to give you a refreshment in employment law again: The Ombudsman’s role is to conduct an investigation into the process by which the Tribunal Service handled the investigation into my complaint.  Whether it was conducted fairly and appropriately in accordance with set procedures. You and the unlawfully nominated REJ Byrne, have not even considered my complaint. Where is the report of the outcome of the investigation handled by an investigating judge?  Therefore  what grounds do I have to contact the ombudsman?

  1. The relevant President may only dismiss a complaint under rule 54(b) or make a direction under rule 54(c) where the relevant President considers there has been no misconduct.

When I asked you in my letter dated 9 June 2017, if you disagreed with me passing on this information, you did not respond, therefore I assume that you are happy for me to make it public.

If you have discriminated against a disabled person by violating his human right act 1998.  If you  are worthy of the title President Employment Tribunals and if the ET in Watford is run by honest people, then it will be public opinion to decide, via the worldwide web, in the interest of Justice because the Law belongs to the people. 

Yours faithfully

Matteo Longobardi

Huge corporations, (my ex-employer is a large group of oil companies                    – Total/BP/Texaco/Kuwait Petroleum) will go to any lengths to avoid accountability and safeguard their reputation and image. (you recall the  BP oil disaster, the     Gulf of Mexico oil spill April 20, 2010 and the failure to comply with health and safety )  This is clearly evident from the facts I have stated above and the threat I received from my ex-employer’s solicitor Mr Marc Jones  Turbervilles Solicitors , in a letter dated 05/04/2016.If you progress with your threats and your actions damage our client’s reputation, then our client will seek legal redress from you Threat.

In conclusion, I am someone who speaks with authority about Health and Safety in Aviation. I have received specialized training for aircraft fueling and have qualifications in Italy dated Rome 4 June 1999 as  employee of  Agip (ENI Group)a big oil  giant and are the follows: 1)Activities and Aviation Product 2)Health & Safety 3)Product Handling and Quality fuel Control 4)Aircrafts Refueling Operation,  I am certain about my affirmation and if anyone has doubts about the credibility of what I am saying, do not hesitate to take action against me for defamation.

lllllllllllllll          Mr Vince Costamzo Director Station Ops Support at American Airlines Dallas USA

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

Falsification of the facts by Employment Judge Vowles

And continue

lllllllllllllll            Proving and evidence

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

I am still waiting an answer from the Employment tribunal in Watford, The respondent has defaulted , But The ET ignore It

The respondent has Fabricated false letters and the Judge Vowles has reported on the out come of decision .

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllStatement of Truth  CPR 1998

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

l

Compliments to the UK Justice System and  the Employment Tribunals President Brian Doyle

Advertisements

Mr M Longbardi v Aviation Fuel Services Ltd: 3322804/2016 -on GOV.UK

Mr M Longbardi v Aviation Fuel Services Ltd: 3322804/2016 – GOV.UK

This corrupt CRIMINAL Employment Tribunal in Watford and Judge Stephen Vowles  have posted this false outcome judgment on gov.uk web site . It was a whistleblowing claim and not discimination because Aviation Fuel Services LTD has failed with safety obligations putting millions of passengers in danger. flying from London Heathrow Airport in (see the link below)

http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.it/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html

Youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP9qf6cP8Wk

UK Justice System is a total deception wake up people- The claimant answers to the criminal Judge Vowles in Watford /Reading accepted bribery by my ex employer- Employment Tribunal and the Employment Appeal tribunal in London too
Address: 30-31 Friar St, Reading RG1 1DP Phone: 0118 959 4917

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/mr-m-longbardi-v-aviation-fuel-services-ltd-3322804-2016

Assist corporations in a UK Employment Tribunal in Reading CRIMINAL Judge Stephen Vowles

The reality is that the entire judicial system in England is corrupt.

Judges as actors in hollywood movies ,favoring multinationals

Here one of example Top CRIMINAL Judge Stephen Vowles UK Employment Tribunal

The false report from the Employment Tribunal https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/mr-m-longbardi-v-aviation-fuel-services-ltd-3322804-2016

Full Story link Whistleblowing claim An employment judge shamefully strike out the claimant’s claim under rule 37 ,To protect the respondent’s reputation

We have seen other case , where this Dishonest Judge Stephen Vowles acted against a victim ,  favoring a corporation .

Drunk British Airways stewardess tried to cover tracks by reading but was caught because book was upside down

 

Helen Whitmore was sacked by British Airways after trying to get on a flight while reeking of booze, a tribunal hear

 

Her claims of unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal were rejected today.

The tribunal heard Miss Whitmore, 53, fell over on a travelator on her way to security check-in.

She said she had no memory of collapsing, blaming her fall on the menopause and said she had suffered nothing more than “a funny turn”.

However four members of airport staff said they could smell alcohol on her breath, with three of them independently saying they had seen her reading from an upside down book in an apparent attempt to cover her tracks.

Miss Whitmore, of West Boldon, Tyne and Wear, had attempted to board a flight to Heathrow at Newcastle airport on October 9, 2014, at around 12.30pm.

She was due to start a shift at 5.15pm on a flight from Heathrow to Hong Kong.

Read more: Passenger accused of molesting air stewardess while drunk

However she was seen swaying and stumbling while making her way to the security check-in, dressed in her BA uniform, before she fell over.

CCTV footage taken from the airport of the moment Miss Whitmore fell over was played to tribunal judge Stephen Vowles.

Even after being shown the CCTV footage Miss Whitmore insisted: “I don’t remember any of that at all.”

However she disagreed with suggestions that she was “zig-zagging” across the travelator.

“I agree I’m not completely walking in a straight line, but I’m not staggering,” she told the hearing.

Four people claimed they could smell alcohol on her breath, including the duty manager at security check-in and a policeman who later interviewed her.

However Miss Whitmore told an employment tribunal in Reading, Berks., the officer, PC Michael Jackson, could only smell alcohol on her as the interview was conducted in a bar area of the airport.

She was taken off the flight but booked onto a later one, with plans being put in place for her to be breathalysed at Heathrow.

However Miss Whitmore went home instead and a friend reported her as being sick.

Tribunal judge Stephen Vowels ruled that the BA air hostess was definitely drunk and dismissed her claims that she fell over because of the menopause, at the conclusion of the employment tribunal.

Judge Vowels said Ms Whitmore was “quite literally falling over drunk” when she entered the airport.

London Employment Tribunal and Appeal tribunal gang of Criminals corrupt  A-British-Airways-plane-at-Newcastle-Airport

Employment Tribunals in the uk ,are corrupt? You have to become a solicitor to understand how these dishonest are well organized .

Whistleblowing claim investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority: Result that a group of oil companies fueling aircrafts at Heathrow Airport has violated the obligations of health and safety, placing millions of passengers in danger.
An employment Judge(Vowles) from Et Watford shamefully strikes out the claimant’s claim under rule 37, To Protect the respondent’s reputation.

Read the story http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html

 

Whhistleblowing claim investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority: Result that a group of oil companies fueling aircrafts at Heathrow Airport has violated the obligations of health and safety, placing millions of passengers in danger.

BEHIND JUSTICE SYSTEM AN ORGANIZATION OF DISHONESTY EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL UK

The  disabled Claimant  sent a formal complaint of judicial conduct (Under Tribunal Rule 2014)to the Employment Tribunals President (Judge Brian Doyle)He  answers:
I am afraid that I must now draw a line under this correspondence.I intend you no discourtesy by so doing.Further correspondence from you on these same matters will be filed without acknowledgment or reply.

Read the full story http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html

Read the full story- http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html

President Brian Doyle                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        London Central Employment Tribunals                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Victory House 30-
34                                                                                                                                                                 Kingsway                                                                                                                                                London                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             WC2B 6EX

Date: 07/06/2017

Mr M Longobardi v Aviation Fuel Services Ltd  Case Number :3322804/2016                         Re: Complaint – Judicial misconduct

Dear President Doyle

Further to your e-mail sent to me today.  Having read your response to my complaint (and also the response from Regional Judge Byrne, who was not officially delegated to look into my complaint).

I followed yours and Regional Judge Byrne’s instruction to look at the website for Judicial Conduct and you will see yourself what the website says regarding such a complaint.  “Complaints about Tribunal Judges must be made to the relevant Chamber President”.

https://judicialconduct.judiciary.gov.uk/making-a-complaint/who-can-i-complain-about/

You should know that the Ombudsman’s role is to conduct an investigation into the process by which the Tribunal Service handled the investigation into my complaint.  Whether it was conducted fairly and appropriately in accordance with set procedures.

I have sent my complaint to you President Doyle, by email on 12 May 2017 and by letters dated 26 May 2017.

Please confirm to me, that you are rejecting the consideration of my complaint against members of Watford Employment Tribunal for judicial misconduct. Bearing in mind that Judge Vowles’ attitude towards me was racist, violating the human rights of a disabled person – the evidence of which is in my e-mail to you dated 12 May 2017.

I think you have possibly misunderstood the nature of my complaint, or you have chosen not to understand.  I therefore am explaining again to you what my complaint is about.

My ex-employer is a huge group of oil companies and globally believes it has the power to control everything.  I have brought several claims to the Employment Tribunal, including a Whistleblowing claim, where my ex employer has failed to to comply with Aviation Health and Safety obligations putting  in danger millions of passengers’ lives flying from Heathrow Airport, (confirmed by Civil Aviation Authority).  Employment Judge Vowles refused to discuss my Whistleblowing claim at the Preliminary Hearing on 29/09/16, therefore protecting my ex-employer and on 22/11/16, I received a letter from the ET stating that this particular claim was not included.  I had to insist on a further Preliminary Hearing to give my evidence.  I followed the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 (ERRA) and I was finally given a date for another Preliminary Hearing on 14/03/17. The Employment Tribunal originally advised both parties on 09/02/17 that the Preliminary Hearing would take place in private (which would protect the Respondent’s reputation).  I had to remind the ET that hearings of this context in the UK are to be public.  At this point, the Employment Judge assisted the Respondent by ordering that they apply to strike out my Whistleblowing claim, in a letter to both parties, dated 22.02.17.

Judge Vowles  wrote  “ the Tribunal will also consider the Respondent’s application to strike out the claims on the grounds of unreasonable and vexatious conduct”.  I have always shown due respect towards the Tribunal and the Respondent.  In the words of Judge Vowles that my conduct was vexatious, this is rude and racist towards me, it is another humiliation against a disabled person, to strike me out at the Preliminary Hearing on 14/03/17.  The Judge also ordered the ET office to send me an ‘urgent’ e-mail with this e-mail address harvinder.panesar@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk  on 13/03/17 (also sent to the Respondent, the previous day to remind the Respondent, that he should strike out my claim). This amounts to conflict of interest, on behalf of my ex-employer.  Thus pushing the Respondent to fabricate an application to strike out my Whistleblowing claim – this was unfortunately not possible to do, as it has already been investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority.

Employment Judge Hill from the ET, Watford refused this application on 08/03/17, the content of which was contained false statement that did not confirm with the criteria of claim.  A letter followed dated 09/03/17 from ET Judge Vowles stating that ET Judge Hill’s letter sent to both parties, had been misquoted and the application to strike out had not been refused.

The Respondent has falsified claims in his application by stating that I have not complied with orders, I have clearly showed that I did comply with orders.  The Respondent has also included in his application threatening letters, as presented at the Preliminary Hearing on 14/03/17, without providing a statement of truth following Civil Procedure rules. This has shamefully resulted in EJ Vowles accusing me directly of sending such letters to the Respondent, without evidence and this influenced his decision.  At the Preliminary Hearing I pointed out many times that I made an application to strike out the Respondent for abuse of proceedings and vexatious conduct, especially producing false statement.  I also asked Judge Vowles to record the facts, at the Preliminary Hearing on 14/03/17 but he refused.  I advised the ET and the Respondent in my letter dated 28/10/16 that the Respondent had been making false statements and advised the other party to use a moderate tone and behaviour.

In addition, the Respondent has failed to comply with order and unless order date 5/12/16 and 11/01/17.  The Respondent has defaulted but the Employment Tribunal has continued to ignore this violation, (how could it be possible that no-one in the ET team dealing with this case did not pick up on this?) assisting the Respondent and in the assumption that the Claimant is ignorant and taking advantage of his disability.  I had no alternative but to apply for a statement of truth (Civil Procedure Rule 22.1) and ask the ET formally if the Respondent complied with order and unless order.

The Employment Tribunal has failed to give me a reply to this and I am still awaiting a response to my letter dated 12/04/17.  Employment Judge Vowles has chosen to strike me out in whole for reasons of conflict of interest and falsifying the facts.  I believe the reasons are based on the influence of my ex-employer (oil companies).

This is a disgraceful scenario and should not happen within the Justice system of this country.  You have access to all correspondence via the HMCTS database server recorderlongobardimatteo@gmail.com and can verify that I am telling the Truth

Yours faithfully

Read Full story http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html

 

BEHIND JUSTICE SYSTEM AN ORGANIZATION OF DISHONESTY EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL UK

Whhistleblowing claim investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority: Result that a group of oil companies fueling aircrafts at Heathrow Airport has violated the obligations of health and safety, placing millions of passengers in danger.
An employment Judge shamefully strikes out the claimant’s claim under rule 37, To Protect the respondent’s reputation.

The  disabled Claimant  sent a formal complaint of judicial conduct (Under Tribunal Rule 2014)to the Employment Tribunals President (Judge Brian Doyle)He  answers:
I am afraid that I must now draw a line under this correspondence.I intend you no discourtesy by so doing.Further correspondence from you on these same matters will be filed without acknowledgment or reply.  An employment Judge shamefully strikes out the claimant’s claim under rule 37, To Protect the respondent’s reputation

June 2017

Read  http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html

http://poisonedjustice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/whistleblowing-claim-employment-judge.html