Mr G Poole v Scot Group Ltd T/A Thrifty Car and Van Rental — 2024

The claim form originally included unfair dismissal, breach of contract, age discrimination, harassment and victimisation. At a private preliminary hearing on 21 July 2023, Employment Judge Manley dismissed the age discrimination and breach of contract complaints upon withdrawal, and the only complaint left to proceed was constructive unfair dismissal.

Before the final hearing due in June 2024, the claimant wrote on 30 and 31 May 2024 to withdraw his claim after a costs warning from the respondent. An ACAS-assisted COT3 was produced and signed by the claimant but not by the respondent. The claimant later wrote on 4 June and 1 July 2024 saying the withdrawal had been made under duress following the costs warning and that the COT3 was null and void.

In the reconsideration application, the claimant referred to Companies House and gov.uk material said to show that a number of the respondent's employees had left in the two years before his resignation. The Tribunal found it was not explained why that was new evidence, why it could not have been obtained earlier, or why it mattered to the application. No medical evidence supported the duress allegation, and the Tribunal noted that the claimant had had the benefit of ACAS involvement and had twice confirmed his intention to withdraw.

Applying Rule 68 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024 and the approach in Ministry of Justice v Burton and anor, the Tribunal held there was no reasonable prospect of the original dismissal judgment being varied or revoked and that reconsideration was not required in the interests of justice. The application for reconsideration was therefore refused, and the Tribunal referred to the need for finality in litigation.