In person For the v Respondent — 2025

The claimant brought an unfair dismissal claim against the University of East Anglia on 11 October 2024. On 3 February 2025 he used the tribunal’s online system to withdraw the claim, then sent a further communication about three and a half hours later seeking to withdraw that withdrawal. The respondent applied for a dismissal judgment, and the tribunal had to decide whether the first withdrawal was effective and whether the claim should now be dismissed under Rule 51 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024.

Employment Judge W Anderson held that the claimant’s withdrawal was clear, unequivocal and unambiguous, and that the tribunal had no power to accept a retraction of such a withdrawal. The judge relied on the authorities cited by the respondent, including Segor, Khan and Campbell, and rejected the claimant’s argument that there was a discretion to revive the claim. The judge also noted that earlier tribunal communications had been confusing, but said the correct position was set out by EJ George on 3 March 2025.

On the Rule 51 question, the tribunal found that the claimant had not shown that issuing a dismissal judgment would be contrary to the interests of justice. The judge accepted that the claimant later said he wanted to continue because of settlement discussions, but found that this did not match the reasons advanced at the hearing, including assertions of family and financial pressure, which were not set out in detail. The judge also noted that the claimant’s written and oral submissions focused mainly on an alleged philosophical belief discrimination point, but that this was not part of the claim; it had only been the subject of an amendment application made after the claim had been withdrawn. The claim was therefore dismissed.