Skip to content
Legal Lens

Legal Lens

Independent, practical help for litigants in person in England & Wales.

Search for:
Log in
Register

Menu

Close
Legal Lens
  • About Legal Lens
    • About Us
    • Who Funds Us?
    • Values, Policies & Protocols
  • Blog
    • Latest Posts
      • Four tracks, one questionnaire: how CPR Part 26 decides where your case goes after a defence is filed
      • Ended before it starts: summary judgment and strike out under CPR Part 24 and rule 3.4 for litigants in person
      • Help with Fees: the court fee remission scheme litigants in person keep paying past
      • The tenancy deposit penalty claim: the simplest court claim a litigant in person can bring
      • Claiming compensation for a data breach: the court route the ICO cannot give you
    • Case Reports
    • Dispute Resolution
    • Legal Innovation
    • Legal Practice
    • Regulatory Matters
    • UK Legal System
  • Get Involved
    • Judicial Review Against the SRA
    • Write for Us
    • Support Us
    • Syndication and Copyright
  • Factsheets & Tools
    • Factsheets
    • Tools
    • Basic Assistance Directory
    • Peer Support Network
    • Trusted Directory
  • Contact & Free Assessment
Legal Lens
  • About Legal Lens
    • About Us
    • Who Funds Us?
    • Values, Policies & Protocols
  • Blog
    • Latest Posts
      • Four tracks, one questionnaire: how CPR Part 26 decides where your case goes after a defence is filed
      • Ended before it starts: summary judgment and strike out under CPR Part 24 and rule 3.4 for litigants in person
      • Help with Fees: the court fee remission scheme litigants in person keep paying past
      • The tenancy deposit penalty claim: the simplest court claim a litigant in person can bring
      • Claiming compensation for a data breach: the court route the ICO cannot give you
    • Case Reports
    • Dispute Resolution
    • Legal Innovation
    • Legal Practice
    • Regulatory Matters
    • UK Legal System
  • Get Involved
    • Judicial Review Against the SRA
    • Write for Us
    • Support Us
    • Syndication and Copyright
  • Factsheets & Tools
    • Factsheets
    • Tools
    • Basic Assistance Directory
    • Peer Support Network
    • Trusted Directory
  • Contact & Free Assessment
Search for:
Log in
Register

Tag: Litigants in Person

  • Home
  • Litigants in Person
  • Page 5
Wrong Respondent in Employment Tribunal Claims: Why the Name on the ET1 Matters
Dispute Resolution

Wrong Respondent in Employment Tribunal Claims: Why the Name on the ET1 Matters

Written by John Barwell 31 May 202618 August 2026

The respondent named on the ET1 is not a formatting detail. It can affect whether the claim is accepted, whether it matches the Acas certificate, whether it can be served, whether limitation is protected, and whether any judgment can be enforced.

Interim Relief in Whistleblowing Dismissal Claims: The Seven-Day Deadline
Dispute Resolution

Interim Relief in Whistleblowing Dismissal Claims: The Seven-Day Deadline

Written by John Barwell 30 May 202618 August 2026

Interim relief is one of the most urgent Employment Tribunal remedies. In qualifying whistleblowing dismissal claims, a claimant may need to apply within seven days of the effective date of termination.

ET1 Drafting: Why Your Employment Tribunal Claim Is Not Just Your Workplace Story
Dispute Resolution

ET1 Drafting: Why Your Employment Tribunal Claim Is Not Just Your Workplace Story

Written by John Barwell 29 May 202618 August 2026

An ET1 is not a diary, grievance bundle, appeal letter or witness statement. It is the pleaded starting point of the Employment Tribunal claim.

Acas Early Conciliation: The ET1 Trap Claimants Cannot Afford to Miss
Dispute Resolution

Acas Early Conciliation: The ET1 Trap Claimants Cannot Afford to Miss

Written by John Barwell 28 May 202618 August 2026

Acas Early Conciliation is not just a pre-claim formality. It can pause time and produce the certificate needed for an ET1, but mistakes with certificate numbers, exemptions, respondent names or deadlines can still put a claim at risk.

Do You Really Have Six Months to Bring an Employment Tribunal Claim?
Dispute Resolution

Do You Really Have Six Months to Bring an Employment Tribunal Claim?

Written by John Barwell 27 May 202618 August 2026

Do not assume you have six months to bring an Employment Tribunal claim. Current time limits, Acas early conciliation and interim relief still need urgent case-specific checking.

What is new in Employment Tribunal law in 2026?
Dispute Resolution

What is new in Employment Tribunal law in 2026?

Written by John Barwell 26 May 202618 August 2026

Employment Tribunal law is changing in stages in 2026. Some rights are already in force, further reforms are expected later in the year, and ordinary unfair dismissal changes are due in 2027. This explainer sets out what workers and employers need to check now.

Employment Tribunals: The Problem Starts Long Before the Hearing
Dispute Resolution

Employment Tribunals: The Problem Starts Long Before the Hearing

Written by John Barwell 21 May 202618 August 2026

Most workers do not start with an ET1. They reach employment tribunal after workplace processes, grievances, Acas early conciliation and settlement opportunities have failed. Reform must start before the tribunal door.

High-conflict clients: why boundaries are part of good client care
Dispute Resolution

High-conflict clients: why boundaries are part of good client care

Written by John Barwell 30 March 202618 August 2026

A practical framework for managing high-conflict clients while protecting process integrity, professional independence, and client care standards.

Why the British justice system sometimes feels morally unfair
Dispute Resolution

Why the British justice system sometimes feels morally unfair

Written by John Barwell 24 January 202618 August 2026

Why courts often reach outcomes that feel unfair — and what litigants in person must understand about law, evidence, and procedure in England & Wales.

Judicial Guidance Quietly Removes Written Evidence Option for Disabled Litigants
Regulatory Matters

Judicial Guidance Quietly Removes Written Evidence Option for Disabled Litigants

Written by John Barwell 14 January 202618 August 2026

A quiet May 2025 change to the Equal Treatment Bench Book removed a written-only evidence adjustment for mental health disabilities—raising concerns about access to justice as tribunals demand increasingly “objective” medical proof for adjustments and postponements.

Page navigation

Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 11 Next

Recent Posts

  • Four tracks, one questionnaire: how CPR Part 26 decides where your case goes after a defence is filed
  • Ended before it starts: summary judgment and strike out under CPR Part 24 and rule 3.4 for litigants in person
  • Help with Fees: the court fee remission scheme litigants in person keep paying past
  • The tenancy deposit penalty claim: the simplest court claim a litigant in person can bring
  • Claiming compensation for a data breach: the court route the ICO cannot give you
Legal Lens

About Legal Lens

  • About Us
  • Who Funds Us?
  • Values, Policies & Protocols

Privacy & Integrity

  • Editorial Standards
  • Investigative Journalism
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Engagement
  • Terms of Use

Get Involved

  • Write for Us
  • Support Us
  • Syndication and Copyright

Contact Us

  • Contact
  • john@legallens.org.uk

© Legal Lens 2026. All rights reserved, except our articles, which are published under CC BY-NC 4.0.

Registered with the ICO (ZB903494). Professional indemnity and cyber risk insurance held.

Privacy Policy