Case 3200151/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Helen Lesley Pudney v Titchmarsh Marina (Walton-On-The Naze) Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 3200151/2021
- Decision date
- 20 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Taylor Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Helen Lesley Pudney
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 16 May 2021 the claimant emailed the tribunal stating that she was withdrawing the claim, saying she had taken independent advice from two counsels. The tribunal treated that withdrawal as clear and unequivocal and, under rule 52 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, issued a dismissal judgment on 20 May 2021.
The claimant later asked for the dismissal judgment to be reconsidered, saying the withdrawal had been sent in error and seeking a further hearing. The respondent opposed that application, relying on the claimant's written withdrawal and the surrounding correspondence. Judge Taylor Date held that the claimant had validly withdrawn the claim and that the withdrawal was not equivocal or ill-considered.
The tribunal found there was no reasonable prospect of the original dismissal judgment being varied or revoked and that reconsideration was not necessary in the interests of justice under rule 70. It referred to Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust [2007] ICR 24 (CA) for the proposition that a tribunal does not have a general power to revive a withdrawn claim simply because the claimant later changes her mind. The application for a hearing and the application for reconsideration were both refused.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | This judgment determines the claimant's application for reconsideration of the dismissal judgment after her 16 May 2021 withdrawal email; the tribunal refused reconsideration and made no substantive merits findings on the underlying claims. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 52, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 70, Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust [2007] ICR 24 (CA)
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.