The proceedings of the Tribunal beginning on 8 June may be viewed remotely. If you do not have a Cloud Video Platform (CVP) link, please contact Watford Employment Tribunal to request it. The email address is watfordet@justice.gov.uk. Please give them the case in your email header: It is Evans v Cambridge University and others (case numbers: 3307960/2023 and others)
Employment Judge Graham has also directed that the witness statements and document bundle may be made available online for those attending the case. Online access to the documents is being managed by the Claimant (Prof Wyn Evans).
Accordingly, the bundle and witness statements will be accessible in a non-downloadable, non-printable format from 10:00am on Monday 8 June 2026, and will remain available each day for the duration of the hearing (or as otherwise directed by the Judge). This ensures that remote participants have equivalent access to those attending in person.
Please note: it is a criminal offence to take screenshots of the witness statements or document bundle or to record the live proceedings.
The principles of Open Justice are important.
It is also important to observe judicial proceedings respectfully and to follow any directions of Employment Judge Graham. We strongly recommend that everyone ensures they are fully in compliance with the rule of law.
The online materials comprise: (i) all witness statements for both Claimant and Respondents; and (ii) nine volumes of the document bundle. All files are provided as password-protected, watermarked PDFs.
The password for each file is ETxxxx, where xxxx should be replaced with the code already issued to you to access the CVP for the live hearing.
If you wish to sign up for the service, please complete the online form here. You must provide your name and email address, which will be shared with Watford Employment Tribunal. This data will not be used for any other purpose by the Claimant and it will be destroyed after the end of the Tribunal on 28 June 2026 (to be compliant with GDPR).
If you sign up, you will be sent a link on Monday 8 June 2026 after 10.00 am to access the material. By entering the site, you will be presumed to have understood the stated conditions regarding the unlawfulness of screenshotting.
These arrangements are subject to any changes, as directed by Employment Judge Graham.
For any software or access problems, please contact testimony@21percent.org & we will try and fix the matter.
29 Comments
Jay · 7 June 2026 at 12:32
Wow … the University is in for a real fight. Be interested to see who is speaking up for HR.
21percent.org · 7 June 2026 at 13:43
We can confirm website statistics are going through the roof. We will provide more data on this shortly. It means the site can be slow.
TheResearcher · 7 June 2026 at 15:45
That is great news. It would be great to know how many of these are from UCam members and who is willing to act after these hearings…
I would like to add that tomorrow I will be in the Employment Tribunal in person because I think it is the minimum I can do for Wyn Evans. He should not be there alone. It would be great to see more people there. The time to change our university is now and we need the help of everyone who is tired of the current culture of secrecy and cover ups.
Wyn Evans · 7 June 2026 at 16:27
Thanks, much appreciated.
Even if folks can’t get to Bury St Edmunds, do please try & follow on CVP link.
It is actually very concerning what our University has become. We all have a collective responsibility for the place & we all want it to prosper
You can make your own judgments when you hear the witnesses being cross-examined.
CVP link available on request from Watford Employment Tribunal.
TheResearcher · 7 June 2026 at 18:47
Do not forget to send the link to Mr Daniel Zeichner MP and his colleagues!
As people may remember, Layla Moran MP asked the Oxford Vice Chancellor for clarification about the hushing up of sexual harassment. I trust that Mr Zeichner is planning to do the same regarding what is happening in Cambridge not only regarding sexual harassment but about the handling of misconduct reports more generally.
DemocracyNow · 7 June 2026 at 20:38
No doubt all of this is going to raise serious questions in parliament at some point. If Mr Daniel Zeichner MP cares about keeping the student vote (and in keeping his seat) then he’d better be asking questions just like Layla Moran MP did. For example, why are harassment reports being ignored, why are whistleblowers getting bullied out of the university, and what are these rumours going around of local police involved in cracking down on dissenters. MPs can raise open questions in parliament – it is high time some serious questions were asked here.
Anonymous · 7 June 2026 at 15:49
Who is “the university” here? I am certainly not up for “a fight” with anyone. Whoever is driving this insanity on the university side is clearly not representing the wishes of its members, a large proportion of whom voted for Wyn in the Chancellor race last year, and I suspect even more would now.
Xerxes · 7 June 2026 at 16:23
Usual story. Small petty-minded individuals face humiliation, so carry on up the escalation ladder at the University’s expense. Reasonable question is where are the adults in the room? It seems there are no adults
$$$$$ · 7 June 2026 at 17:13
I think the real scandal is a VC desperate to cut the deficit .. but as soon as she is up at court, suddenly there’s all the budget in the world to hire the most expensive KC for 4-6 weeks, not to mention solicitors and probably PR too, even though we all know this costs crazy money – probably enough to have given all low-income staff a massive Cambridge allowance.
£££££ · 7 June 2026 at 17:29
There is no deficit, Cambridge University does, in fact, generate a surplus.
The issue is simply that it has chosen to channel these funds into its long-term endowment rather than use them to address current needs. Whether that is a prudent approach is open to debate.
As you say, austerity is always for the little people. Plenty of troughing at the top table.
Furious · 7 June 2026 at 17:29
Classic corruption: public money spent to protect private individuals. Would the Regent House have approved all this spending, if it meant cutting back funds from a Cambridge allowance? Who really represents the university in this case?
???? · 7 June 2026 at 17:33
It’s a fake surplus though, right? It is just an accounting trick due to growing annual transfers from CUEF, and burying all the construction costs in there. There was even a little asterisk about that in the latest report.
ticktock · 7 June 2026 at 17:40
Well, possibly that, but also the fact that the VC claims all the time to be “working very hard” (hence unable to reply emails), but now has the time to leave the university rudderless for a month while off at court. Given her pay packet that also seems a very expensive diversion of staff time as well, but what I think we can all agree on is that the university needs leadership right now to guide through key strategic decisions, not a VC completing her guide to the UK with a guided visit to court.
blackdog · 7 June 2026 at 17:46
She is certainly unable to reply to emails, though for what reason we can only conjecture. Whether due to some grave impediment or intense work load or simply a highly selective approach to correspondence, she never replies to anything in a useful manner.
Remember remember · 7 June 2026 at 17:51
Don’t worry I’m sure a guided visit to a parliamentary oversight committee will be next on this grand tour. What I find most unsettling is that she seems permanently amused by the ordeal – somehow like it is all just a big running joke only she is party to.
VCwatch · 7 June 2026 at 18:21
Of course she is working hard. I mean, the Vet School won’t shut itself down by itself. It needs a lot of heavy pushing
Anon · 7 June 2026 at 18:32
For all those among us told to make 5% department budget cuts on account of the “operating deficit” news of a surplus is a big surprise. Anyhow, I think the mistake here is confusion over the headline number (reported as a Group surplus) and the “adjusted operating result” (reported as an £8m deficit). I note that if the university spent £1.4m on legal advice over the C4P saga alone, and is burning similar amounts on this and other recent cases, then trigger-happy legal spending explains much if not all of this deficit. Though in fact for the university alone (excluding CUPA) the deficit has actually widened from -£47m to -£105m in recent years, and who knows how bad it is now. Of course spending vast sums on consultants and lawyers might well explain this much larger number, not to mention IT cost overruns and out of control administrative hiring.
21percent.org · 7 June 2026 at 18:51
A good summary, the University is very reliant on CUPA. Everything else you say is pitch perfect.
+ · 7 June 2026 at 18:45
Don’t forget the six million the university is now paying every year to get people to leave. That plus the High Court case last year is the entire operating deficit alone.
Question · 7 June 2026 at 14:56
Can you get a link to the documents without a link for remote viewing?
21percent.org · 7 June 2026 at 15:23
We will check with the Employment Judge whether this is permissible on Monday.
However, it is straightforward to ask for a CVP link from the Tribunal & this will grant access
Hemostat · 7 June 2026 at 17:59
Will anyone be live tweeting/blogging the tribunal (with the necessary procedures and permissions in place of course). I hope journalists will be there too.
I’ll be on long hospital shifts all week but hope to follow.
Cvp · 7 June 2026 at 20:09
I hope so, but we all need to respect the rules on screenshotting, and respect the authority of the tribunal to reach its independent decision on this case. After waiting so long to see justice done let’s all respect the need to see this done right – just because they went low, that is all the more reason for us to go high.
KCSU · 7 June 2026 at 18:22
I wonder if King’s College JCR has a link yet? For all those infuriated by how Registrary and VC handled harassment complaints this will be a lot better than watching the World Cup.
Anonymous · 7 June 2026 at 19:38
I think more people will join on the second week (15th) when the real fireworks begin – especially for Rampton. We all have a lot of questions to ask even though we have to make do with seeing her answer to her actions in this specific case. Oh and incidentally why is the university paying her legal costs including a top barrister when she is no longer an employee and has cost the university for all this mess (just as she did over the High Court case last year). I mean it is not like she wasn’t paid enough to afford her own representation.
Wyn Evans · 7 June 2026 at 19:48
The cross-examination begins with me for the first two days. It will be well worth listening to.
It will provide the context as to why Rampton & Prentice are named explicitly as respondents.
SPARTACUS · 7 June 2026 at 20:24
All the best for Wyn Evans! His case will be the end of the beginning! American Queen is finished!
Doing the Hard Work · 7 June 2026 at 21:33
It does feel like this is the end. All it took for Toope to leave was a few awkward stories in the press about freedom of speech. We’ve had endless press scandals, driven the deficit to 105 million pounds in the red, are facing scores of court cases, and have sunk to fourth place in the Times UK rankings, and through it all, the VC just keeps grinning along and putting out yet another one of those silly videos. A period of deep self-reflection is sorely required: and for staff to stand up and be ready to fix the university’s many deep-rooted problems.
TrickyDicky · 8 June 2026 at 05:17
We’re also close to the end. Just as in Watergate, the mistakes were made by a couple of low level bunglers (Peake & Akroyd), but the cover-up went to the top. VC probably didn’t even realise she was covering up, just doing what the Mad Rampton told her.