Case 6027164/2025 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Brian Donnelly First v Flexi Recruitment Services Ltd Second Respondent: Wincanton Ltd Wincanton plc — 2026

Case reference: 6027164/2025
Decision date: 6 February 2026
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Camp

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Brian Donnelly First

Respondent

Flexi Recruitment Services Ltd Second Respondent: Wincanton Ltd Wincanton plc

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant applied under Rule 7(2) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 for decisions of Legal Officer Singh to be considered afresh. Those decisions had treated the claimant as having withdrawn his claims against both respondents and had dismissed the claims on withdrawal under rules 50 and 51.

Employment Judge Camp found that the claimant's 19 September 2025 email explicitly withdrew the claim against the first respondent only. The judge set aside the judgment against the second respondent and reinstated that claim, while confirming that the claim against the first respondent remained withdrawn and dismissed.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment does not determine the merits of this claim. It records that the claim against the first respondent remains withdrawn and dismissed, while the judgment dismissing the claim against the second respondent was set aside and that claim was reinstated.	Other	—	—
Disability discrimination	The judgment does not determine the merits of this claim. The claim type is taken from the case listing context; the judgment itself addresses only withdrawal, dismissal upon withdrawal, and reinstatement against the second respondent.	Other	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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.