Mr W Zima v Dionard Guest House Limited — 2025

The tribunal held that the res judicata doctrine, in the wider sense applicable in Scotland as explained in British Airways plc v Boyce [2001] IRLR 157 (CSIH), applied to the whole claim. It found that substantially the same complaints had already been decided and dismissed by EJ Hosie in claim number 801727/2024, and that any additional complaints now advanced could and should have been brought in that earlier case.

On that basis, the tribunal struck out the claim in its entirety under rule 38(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 because it had no reasonable prospect of success, and under rule 38(1)(b) because it was not reasonable to bring the claim in those circumstances. It also said the fundamental issues of employee or worker status were res judicata between the parties and gave the same reasons for concluding the complaints had no reasonable prospect of success and were unreasonably brought.

The tribunal additionally found that the complaints were brought outside the applicable statutory time limits and were alternatively dismissed because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them. Although the threshold for an award of expenses in the respondent's favour was crossed under rule 74(2)(a) and rule 74(2)(b), the judge, having heard evidence about the claimant's financial means and other personal circumstances and applied the overriding objective, declined to make an expenses award.