Case 1404971/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D C Huxley v 1 Eco-eye Ltd 2 Mr T J Pumphrey — 2019
- Case reference
- 1404971/2018
- Decision date
- 1 November 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Reed Dated
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D C Huxley
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 16 September 2019, Employment Judge Reed dismissed the claimant’s claims on the basis that they were out of time. By email dated 29 September 2019, the claimant sought reconsideration, saying his statements were accurate and true and that his case would have been meritorious had it proceeded to a full hearing.
The Tribunal recorded that reconsideration can only be ordered where it is necessary in the interest of justice. The claimant did not identify anything incorrect or improper in the earlier dismissal, and the judgment notes that he said he could accept the ruling.
In those circumstances, the Tribunal found there was no reasonable prospect of the decision being varied or revoked and refused the reconsideration application. No award or other remedy was made in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Application for reconsideration of the 16 September 2019 judgment; refused because the Tribunal found there was no reasonable prospect of the decision being varied or revoked. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- interest of justice
- no reasonable prospect of the decision being varied or revoked
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.