X v Y and Z: 2402350/2024
JUDGMENT
The judgment of the Tribunal is that:(1) The claimant’s unauthorised deductions complaint was not presented within the applicable time limit. It was reasonably practicable to do so. The complaint of unauthorised deductions is therefore dismissed.(2) The claimant’s discrimination and harassment complaints were not presented within the applicable time limit. It is not just and equitable to extend the time limit. The claim is therefore dismissed.REASONS
[1]There is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked.[2]The claimant’s application and his supporting emails sent following an invitation that the parties make submissions concerning reconsideration on 7 October 2025, (sent by the claimant on 14 and 17 October 2025), does not identify any grounds which would support the reconsideration requested.[3]Unfortunately, the claimant has focused upon the revocation of the Rule 49 Restricted Reporting Order which I made on 14 June 2024. This will be dealt with separately in correspondence, but for the purposes of the claimant’s application for reconsideration, it does not amount to grounds for reconsidering the judgment as it did not affect the parties’ ability to participate in the public preliminary hearing on 15 August 2025.[4]Apart from these submissions, the claimant has disappointingly resorted to abusive comments in his email dated 14 October 2025 both in terms of language used and disagreeable opinions made in respect of the other parties and the Tribunal. Sadly, this continued in his next email dated 17 October 2025. Case Number: 2402350/2024 2[5]While the claimant is undoubtedly upset by the outcome of the preliminary hearing on 15 August 2025, he must not forget that he is proceeding in an Employment Tribunal, within the Courts and Tribunal system and parties are expected and required to behave in a considerate and polite manner. Failure to adopt such an approach amounts to contempt of the Courts and Tribunals system and can result in further action being taken.[6]It is noted that the respondents’ representatives have both challenged the claimant’s application seeking reconsideration and object to it.[7]Consequently, the application for reconsideration is refused. Date: 12 November 2025 Approved by