At tribunal a manager for the respondent explained what information a specific document shows. He said he knows this because he had worked with these documents for over 10 years.
I, the claimant, went on the stand and contested the information that would be shown in the document. Although I had only worked with these documents for a year, I had the most recent experience with them and it was my job to deal with them.
Another manager, who was a respondent witness but not present when I or the first manager gave evidence about this document, went on the stand and gave his account of the document. He too had only been dealing with this document for a year and had recent experience of it. His version of the document matched my version.
We now have two people, one of which is a respondent witness, confirming what information a specific document shows. The tribunal sided with the first manager because the first manager had more years experience with the document.
Does that seem a reasonable conclusion for the tribunal to make?
I, the claimant, went on the stand and contested the information that would be shown in the document. Although I had only worked with these documents for a year, I had the most recent experience with them and it was my job to deal with them.
Another manager, who was a respondent witness but not present when I or the first manager gave evidence about this document, went on the stand and gave his account of the document. He too had only been dealing with this document for a year and had recent experience of it. His version of the document matched my version.
We now have two people, one of which is a respondent witness, confirming what information a specific document shows. The tribunal sided with the first manager because the first manager had more years experience with the document.
Does that seem a reasonable conclusion for the tribunal to make?
Comment