Miss S Cole and Others v Meadowbrook Surgery: 1303412/2023
JUDGMENT
[1]The application by the first claimant for reconsideration of the Judgment sent on 6 December 2024 is refused.REASONS
[2]The Judgment sent on 6 December 2024 dismissed the first claimant’s complaint of unfair dismissal because it was not presented within the statutory time limit despite it being reasonably practicable to do so. The first claimant applied for reconsideration on 19 December 2024.[3]By that application she seeks to explain or reframe the evidence she gave about why she presented her claim to the Tribunal after the statutory time limit had expired. She stated in evidence that she ‘skimmed through’ the relevant documents and made a mistake as to when the time limit expired. She now states that this is explained by medication she was taking for migraine which affected her eyesight, concentration and caused brain fog.[4]She relies on GP records which were before me when I made my Judgment and a letter from the GP which was obtained after my decision. The letter simply repeats the claimant’s assertion to the GP that her medication contributed to her missing a deadline.[5]In my view the first claimant is seeking to reopen the evidence I heard on the facts, to change her evidence and/or persuade me to come to a different conclusion on 1 of 2 Case No. 1303412/2023 the evidence. She has not identified any procedural shortcoming or new evidence of which she could not have known at the time of the hearing.[6]In my view this is not a sound basis on which to apply for reconsideration. There is no reasonable prospect of my Judgment being varied or revoked. It is therefore fair and proportionate to refuse the application at this stage pursuant to rule 70(2) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 (or its predecessor rule 72(1) of the 2013 Rules). Approved by: