Case 1305282/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Redmond v Selfridges Retail Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1305282/2021
- Decision date
- 4 March 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Faulkner
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Redmond
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Redmond presented his claim on 29 December 2021. After the respondent applied to strike out, the tribunal converted the matter to a public preliminary hearing. On 17 February 2022 the claimant emailed that he wished to "drop the case". Legal Officer Metcalf treated that email as a withdrawal under rule 51 and issued a judgment dismissing the claim under rule 52, which was sent to the parties on 4 March 2022.
Mr Redmond then sought reinstatement on 7 March 2022 and later said he wanted to pursue disability discrimination, wrongful dismissal and breach of contract loss of earnings. Employment Judge Camp treated that email as an application under regulation 10A(2) for the Legal Officer's decisions to be considered afresh. The judge held that rule 51 means a withdrawn claim comes to an end and cannot be revived, relied on Khan v Heywood & Middleton Primary Care Trust and Campbell v OCS Group UK Ltd & Anor, and upheld the decision to dismiss the claim. The judgment records that the claim remained dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Procedural decision only. The claimant's 17 February 2022 email was treated as a withdrawal under rule 51, and the claim was dismissed under rule 52. No merits determination was made on the underlying complaints. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- regulation 10A(2)
- rule 51
- rule 52
- Khan v Heywood & Middleton Primary Care Trust
- Campbell v OCS Group UK Ltd & Anor
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.