Mr V Naicker v Sentinel Group Security Ltd: 3200354/2024
JUDGMENT
[1]The complaint of unauthorised deductions from wages is not well-founded and dismissed.[2]The Claimant is employed by the Respondent and so the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the claim for breach of contract. The claim for breach of contract is therefore dismissed.REASONS
[1]On 13 February 2025 I gave judgment and oral reasons that the claimant’s claim of unauthorised deductions from wages is not well-founded and dismissed. I also decided that, as the Claimant is employed by the Respondent, the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear the claim for breach of contract. The claim for breach of contract was therefore dismissed.[2]By an email dated 11 March 2025 the Claimant made an application under Rule 69 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 for reconsideration of my judgment.[3]The Claimant’s application is on the grounds that the ‘dismissal of his claims does not align with the legal protections provided by TUPE law in terms of base salary and the Employment Rights Act of 1996’. The reasons provided in the Claimant’s letter are essentially a summary of his claim that I heard and determined on 13 February 2025.[4]There is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked because there is no new evidence or change of circumstances. The Claimant is essentially asserting that he disagrees with the reasons for my judgment. Finality of legal proceedings is important. Case Number: 3200354/2024 Therefore, the interests of justice do not require me to reconsider my judgment.