Gibraltar Corruption

Is there still Rule of Law in Gibraltar? Is there corruption in the local police?

Are employees' Human Rights protected? Is there a mafia in Gibraltar?

How corrupt are the Courts in Gibraltar? Is Entain a bad employer?

Scope of the Tribunal Hearing
Page 1540 B – 1541 E and 1543 C – 1544 B and 1545 A – 1547 E: a little discussion arises about what the ten-day hearing is about. I had brought up several legal arguments in my skeleton argument which were immediately dismissed by the Chairman. At no point was the option mentioned that my Claim Form could be altered. It was brought up by Mr Martinez on many occasions in preliminary hearings that a number of claims were not mentioned in my Claim Form, although the basis of the claim was clearly present. By not using the correct legal language, Mr Martinez said that I was therefore not entitled to follow up on those claims, like: whistleblowing, breach of contract, unfair grievance procedure, reasonableness of dismissal, unfair dismissal procedure, etc. I believe that the Chairman has very limited the scope of my claims throughout the proceedings and acted unfairly by refusing to consider all of my claims. It is a fact that I brought some of my claims later in the proceedings as my understanding of the Law was growing because of many hours of self-study. The principle of Equality of Arms in Court, which is part of my Human Rights, had been thrown overboard.

Another factor which has seriously impacted on my preparations for hearings, was the Respondent's refusal to disclose evidence which I had requested, evidence which was beneficial for my claims. The best example is that the written evidence proving that no fair grievance investigation procedure was followed, was only disclosed at the end of the ninth day of the ten day hearing, although I had mentioned the sham investigation as such in my Claim Form. The Respondent has gone to great lengths to hide certain evidence which was easily retrievable. Unfortunately, the Chairman never made an issue of this, although it clearly put me at a disadvantage. It is one of the reasons why I believe that the Chairman was not impartial. The refusal to include evidence by Entain was an abuse of process and a failure to comply with the law. But everything was fine for the Tribunal Chairman, Judge Yeats in the Supreme Court and the 3 Judges from the Court of Appeal. Very strange, isn't it?

All information published in this website is in the public domain or reflects the opinion of the author. As such this website's content is protected by Art 10. of the Gibraltar Constitution Order 2006, Protection of freedom of expression:
"Except with his own consent, no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, that is to say, freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference."