Case 3202864/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Stan v Hermes Parcelnet Limited — 2023
- Case reference
- 3202864/2022
- Decision date
- 4 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lewis
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Stan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe judgment is a decision on the claimant's applications for reconsideration of an earlier judgment. The Tribunal treated emails dated 27 September 2023 and 4 October 2023 as reconsideration applications under Rule 70 of the Employment Tribunal Rules 2012 and considered whether there were reasonable prospects of the original decision being varied or revoked.
The Tribunal refused the applications. It rejected the allegation of bad faith, held that the claimant was seeking to re-litigate factual findings, and declined to consider new evidence because the claimant had not shown that it could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence for the original hearing. The Tribunal also stated that the claimant had not identified a day for which he had not been paid, either before the claim began or in his evidence.
The Tribunal further rejected the claimant's Article 6 and discrimination assertions about the conduct of the hearing, stating that the claimant had a fair chance to put his case and that the process, legal principles, statement, evidence, and questioning were addressed. It concluded that there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The reconsideration judgment records that the original claim failed because the claimant could not point to a day for which he had not been paid. The full original judgment is not included in the supplied text, but this reconsideration decision states there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claimant's applications dated 27 September 2023 and 4 October 2023 for reconsideration of the judgment sent on 4 October 2023 were refused. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- Rule 70 of the Tribunal Rules 2012
- Rule 72 of the Tribunal Rules 2012
- Flint v Eastern Electricity Board [1975] ICR 395
- Ladd v Marshall [1954] EWCA Civ 1
- Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998
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.