Mr A Byford v London Borough of Hillingdon: 3310152/2022
JUDGMENT
[1]The Claimant’s application to amend his claim is refused.[2]The Claimant’s complaint of making a protected disclosure pursuant to s47B of Employment Rights Act 1996 is struck out pursuant to rule 37 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.[3]As there is no outstanding complaints the entirety of this claim is dismissed.REASONS
There is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked, because[1]the claimant is seeking to introduce a new claim not previously pleaded or formed the discussions at the hearings held on 8 March 2023 and 14 June 2023.[2]there must be finality in litigation, and that reconsideration is not a right or opportunity to make a new claim. _____________________________ Employment Judge Bansal Date: 15/4/2024[6]Guidance for Tribunals on how to approach applications for reconsideration was given by Simler P in the case of Liddington v 2Gether NHS Foundation Trust UKEAT/0002/16/DA. Paragraphs 34 and 35 provide as follows: “34. […] a request for reconsideration is not an opportunity for a party to seek to re-litigate matters that have already been litigated, or to reargue matters in a different way or adopting points previously omitted. There is an underlying public policy principle in all judicial proceedings that there should be finality in litigation, and reconsideration applications are a limited exception to that rule. They are not a means by which to have a second bite at the cherry, nor are they intended to provide parties with the opportunity of a rehearing at which the same evidence and the same arguments can be rehearsed but with different emphasis or additional evidence that was previously available being tendered. Tribunals have a wide discretion whether or not to order reconsideration. Where […] a matter has been fully ventilated and properly argued, and in the absence of any identifiable administrative error or event occurring after the hearing that requires a reconsideration in the interests of justice, any asserted error of law is to be corrected on appeal and not through the back door by way of a reconsideration application.”[7]The claimant’s application was received within the relevant time limit in accordance with Rule 71. The application has also been copied to the respondent.[8]The application for reconsideration appears to be made on the following Grounds, namely (i) the decision is unfair and unjust in the public interest; (b) he did not realise the term constructive dismissal; and (c) at the time of submission the claimant was suffering with PTSD and severe stress.[9]The The claimant is a disappointed claimant is a disappointed litigant and litigant and is is seeking to have aseeking to have a further afurther attempt ttempt to to rere--argue his position argue his position having having had a full opportunity had a full opportunity at the previous hearings. at the previous hearings. It is not It is not the purpose of reconsideration to allow a party to the purpose of reconsideration to allow a party to the the opportunity to opportunity to rerehearse the arguments that have already been madehearse the arguments that have already been made and exploredand explored. . It is It is a a fundamental fundamental rrequirement of litigation there is equirement of litigation there is certainty and finalitycertainty and finality. . 1 100. . If there was an error of lawIf there was an error of law, this is a matter for appeal and not , this is a matter for appeal and not reconsideration. reconsideration. The claimant has not argued The claimant has not argued or identifiedor identified an error of law. an error of law.[11]ThThis is application application does not does not raise raise any any new new information or which he could not information or which he could not havehave raised at the hearingraised at the hearing which would make reconsideration necessary in which would make reconsideration necessary in the interests of justice. the interests of justice. 1 122. . In the circumstances the application for reconsideration is rejected on the In the circumstances the application for reconsideration is rejected on the basis there is no reasonable prospect of basis there is no reasonable prospect of the judgment the judgment being varied being varied or revokedor revoked. Accordingly, . Accordingly, the application for reconsideration the application for reconsideration is is therefore therefore refused.refused.