How have the courts treated contradictions in the testimony of an employment tribunal panel?

In its zeal to find contradictions, the panel overlooked the central element in the applicant's claim. The duty of the panel was to assess the substance of the claim and not to put all the emphasis on what it perceived to be contradictions, as Mr. Justice Marceau held in Djama v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1992] F.C.J. no. 531: In our opinion, the members of the panel clearly exaggerated the import of a few apparent contradictions, hesitations or vague statements which they succeeded in detecting in the comments of the claimant, and they could not on that basis alone treat his testimony as a whole as being the testimony of a liar. It seems to us that their fixation on the details of what he stated to be his history caused them to forget the substance of the facts on which he based his claim.