Mr R Thomas v Michael Michael HELD: Sheffield — 2021

At the open preliminary hearing on 21 April 2021, the tribunal had already been unable to identify clear legal complaints from the claimant's pleadings and further information. Judge Brain recorded that the claimant had been given multiple opportunities to particularise the case, including directions from Employment Judges Smith and Jones and a further letter from Employment Judge Maidment, but had still not set out focused legal claims.

When the hearing resumed, the claimant declined to proceed with the suggested template for clarifying the issues, said words to the effect that he was 'done', terminated his video link, and then emailed the tribunal shortly afterwards saying 'I'm done' and 'I'm over it'. The tribunal treated those acts and the email together as an unequivocal withdrawal of the complaint and dismissed it under Rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.

The claimant applied the next day for reinstatement, arguing that he had not used the word 'withdrawal'. Judge Brain held that the email wording was a proxy for withdrawal and that the claimant had clearly intended to end the case. Applying the reconsideration power under Rules 70 to 73 and the overriding objective in Rule 2, the tribunal found no reasonable prospect of the judgment being varied or revoked. It also considered finality, proportionality, and the respondent's position, and refused reconsideration.

The judgment also recorded that the tribunal remained unable to discern the substance of any jurisdictionally valid complaint, and that the claimant's later correspondence continued to focus on matters outside the tribunal's jurisdiction, including a motor vehicle dispute. On that basis, the tribunal refused to reopen the case.