Miss A Niculae v Oasis Dental Care Ltd: 6032266/2025
JUDGMENT
The claimant’s application dated 20 December 2025 for reconsideration (more correctly it is an application that the Legal Officer’s decision be considered afresh by a Judge) of the judgment sent to the parties on 8 October 2025 is refused.REASONS
[1]The claimant presented her claim form on the 1 September 2025.[2]She named the respondent as Oasis Dental Care Limited. She gave that company’s registered office address in box 2.2 of the claim form.[3]In box 2.4 she stated she worked at 18 Beckenham Road, Beckenham, BR3 4LS.[4]The Acas certificate (the date of receipt was 30 June 2025) issued on the 11 August 2025 gave the respondent’s name as Bupa Dental Care Beckenham Total Orthodontics. The address was 18 Beckenham Road, Beckenham, BR3 4LS.[5]A Legal Officer wrote to the claimant on the 4 September 2025: In your ET1 claim form you have named the respondent as ‘Oasis Dental Care Limited'. You have provided an ACAS early conciliation number which names ‘BUPA DENTAL CARE BECKENHAM TOTAL ORTHODONTICS’ as the prospective respondent. A claim where the name of the prospective respondent on the early conciliation certificate is not the same as the name of the respondent on the claim form risks being rejected. Please provide a valid early conciliation number/certificate. Please reply by 11th September 2025.[6]On the 4 September 2025 the claimant responded: For your reference, I have attached a copy of my Early Conciliation certificate issued by ACAS. My ACAS conciliator advised me that Total Orthodontics and Bupa Dental Care are trading names of Oasis Dental Care Limited (Registered in England and Wales, No. 00478127. Registered office: Bupa Dental Care, Vantage Office Park, Old Gloucester Road, Hambrook, Bristol, United Kingdom BS16 1GW). Based on this, my Case Number: 6032266/2025 conciliator confirmed that the correct legal entity to use is Oasis Dental Care Limited t/a Bupa Dental Care.[7]The Legal Officer then wrote to the claimant on the 8 October 205 and rejected the claim, giving the reasons as: ‘… although you have given an early conciliation number in section 2 of the claim form, the name of the prospective respondent on the early conciliation certificate is not the same as the name of the respondent on the claim form. I enclose some explanatory notes called ‘Claim Rejection – Early Conciliation: Your Questions Answered’. They include information about applying for reconsideration of the decision to reject your claim.’[8]The Tribunal file shows that along with that letter, a document entitled ‘CLAIM REJECTION - YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED’ was sent to the claimant. That document does explain that it is possible to request a reconsideration of the decision.[9]The claimant appealed that decision to the EAT. The EAT stayed the appeal on the 15 December 2025 and suggested to the claimant that she apply for a reconsideration. The claimant did so on the 20 December 2025.[10]The Tribunal has considered the Legal Officer’s decision afresh (in accordance with Rule 7(2). The claimant said that she was not informed she could apply for a reconsideration. That is not correct and the claimant was so informed on the 8 October 2025.[11]The claimant did not make such an application within the time limit specified.[12]There was not enough information in the claim form to link the two entities in the way the claimant set out on the 4 September 2025. Furthermore, the claimant said that Acas conciliator ‘confirmed that the correct legal entity to use is Oasis Dental Care Limited t/a Bupa Dental Care’. Had the claimant identified the respondent as such, there would not have been an issue with the name of the respondent in the claim form and in the Acas certificate.[13]The claimant’s request for an Employment Judge to consider the Legal Officer’s decision afresh is rejected as it was not made within the original 14 day time limit. Approved by