Employment Judge Shastri-HurstIn person for claimantMs K Moss (instructed by counsel) for respondentDate 2 December 2024
JUDGMENT
[1]The claim is dismissed, as the Tribunal does not have territorial jurisdiction to hear the claimant’s complaints.
REASONS
There is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked, because “The claimant had a fair and proper opportunity at the hearing on 2 December 2024 to make any representations he wished to make on the matter in question, as did the respondent. The application for reconsideration presents no new information to the Tribunal. As the Employment Appeal Tribunal observed in Ebury Partners UK Ltd v M Acton Davis [2023] EAT 40 (at paragraph 24) "The employment tribunal can … only reconsider a decision if it is necessary to do so “in the interests of justice.” A central aspect of the interests of justice is that there should be finality in litigation. It is therefore unusual for a litigant to be allowed a “second bite of the cherry” and the jurisdiction to reconsider should be exercised with caution. In general, while it may be appropriate to reconsider a decision where there has been some procedural mishap such that a party had been denied a fair and proper opportunity to present his case, the jurisdiction should not be invoked to correct a supposed error made by the Tribunal after the parties have had a fair opportunity to present their cases on the relevant issue." Date: 29 January 2025 Approved by