Case 1300614/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Ross Hancher v Kantar UK Ltd RECONSIDERATION — 2026
- Case reference
- 1300614/2019
- Decision date
- 8 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Camp Approved
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ross Hancher
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal considered the claimant's application for reconsideration of what he said was a judgment dismissing the claim upon withdrawal following an Acas settlement dated 7 February 2020. Because of the age of the case, the Tribunal no longer had the original paperwork and proceeded on the assumption that the judgment existed.
The reconsideration application was refused under rule 70(2) because the Tribunal considered there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. The reasons included that, under rule 51 of the 2013 Rules and the authorities cited, a withdrawn claim could not be revived, and that the medical evidence did not support the asserted lack of capacity in February 2020.
The Tribunal also noted doubts about whether a fair final hearing would be possible so many years later and found that the claimant had not explained matters relating to his previous legal representative or the timing of the reconsideration application.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The reconsideration judgment states that the claimant described the original judgment as dismissing the claim upon withdrawal following an Acas settlement on 7 February 2020. The Tribunal no longer had the original paperwork and assumed the judgment existed for the purposes of the reconsideration decision. | Settled | Disability | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The gov.uk listing identifies unlawful deduction from wages, but the reconsideration judgment does not set out the original pleaded issues. The original paperwork was unavailable, and the judgment records the claimant's description of dismissal upon withdrawal after Acas settlement. | Settled | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- rule 70(2) of The Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024
- rule 51 of Tribunal Rules of 2013
- Khan v Heywood & Middleton Primary Care Trust [2006] EWCA Civ 1087
- Campbell v OCS Group UK Ltd & Anor [2017] ICR D19
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.