Mrs H Tickner v Cromwell's Estate Agents (Wallington) Ltd: 2300697/2016
JUDGMENT
The respondent’s application dated 22 November 2016 for reconsideration of the remedy judgment sent to the parties on 31 October 2016 with written reasons being sent to the parties on 8 December 2016 is refused.REASONS
[1]This application is brought pursuant to rule 71 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013. Rule 72 provides that an Employment Judge shall consider any application made under rule 71 and if the judge considers that there is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked the application shall be refused and the Tribunal shall inform the parties of the refusal.[2]There is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. The matters raised in the Claimant’s application amount to little more than an attempt to re-argue matters which were considered and rejected by the tribunal at the hearing.[3]The reasons for the judgment set out the reasons for the Tribunal’s decision in full. As stated all evidence was heard and considered even if not specifically noted in the written reasons and this includes the witness statements of the Claimant’s witnesses.[4]In respect of the order for costs, there is no reasonable prospect of this part of the judgment being varied or revoked. Full argument was heard from both parties and the written reasons set out why costs were awarded and highlighted the costs warning letters sent by the Respondent and how this impacted on the decision to award costs. Case Number: 2300697/16