Lewisham Council Dismiss Disabled Employee
A former Lewisham Council employee who
brought employment tribunal claims against Lewisham Council and
its senior managers for unlawful disability discrimination, whistleblowing
detriment, unfair dismissal and human rights breaches has now brought
High Court proceedings against them and other Defendants’,
(including Ralph Wilkinson, Christine Grice, Elaine Smith, Valerie
Gonsalves, Kate Parsley, Elaine Hattam and Dr Anthony Williams of
‘WorkingFit’) for defamation.
The Claimant is also alleging that the Respondents’ are guilty of conspiracy, perversion of the course of justice and making a mockery of the Employment Tribunal and the judicial system as a whole.
We understand that the Claimant has contacted Lewisham Council’s legal team on several occasion regarding the use of the public funds they allegedly misappropriated through a forgery, blunt misconduct in public office, deception, dishonest handling of funds, (belonging to and intended for others), with a view to expose the reckless mentalities of the public servants who allegedly abuse their positions at the expense of vulnerable targeted victims like herself, but her concerns were dismissed.
The Claimant is alleging that the Respondents’ and their representatives wilfully and maliciously fabricated/falsified evidence against her and submitted fraudulent evidence to the Tribunal, (which allegedly publicly defamed her), in the clear knowledge of the severe consequences for her of their actions, i.e. dismissal/financial loss, exacerbation of her health/risk of relapse of her depression, stigma/damage to her reputation, debarment from future employment etc.
The Claimant alleges that Lewisham Council and their legal representatives have wilfully corrupted and conspired to disrupt the just disposal of proceedings; thus conspiring to destroy the public trust and her and that this therefore constitutes intimidation/harassment of her, (the (Claimant and witness) and openly lying to the Courts (ET and EAT) about the case with the objective of obstructing justice. She further alleges that the Respondents’ conduct amounts to a misuse of the privilege of legal process in order to vilify her, (a vulnerable, unrepresented and disabled Claimant), and paint her as a vexatious litigant.
Read more on School-info4u.com...