Claimant v ISS Facility Services Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
Claimant withdrew this claim in letter of 16 June 2025. The claim was dismissed under rule 51 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 following the withdrawal.
Claimant withdrew this claim in letter of 16 June 2025. The claim was dismissed under rule 51 Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 following the withdrawal.
Data breach claim was withdrawn by the claimant in letter of 18 May 2025.
Claimant confirmed at preliminary hearing on 4 June 2025 that she wished to withdraw this claim, which was then dismissed on 11 June 2025.
Tribunal found no claim of victimisation had been properly made in the original claim form or at the preliminary hearing. The claimant had not made an application to amend. Even if a claim existed, it would have been struck out for having no prospects of success as the constituent elements of victimisation were not established, and judicial proceedings immunity would have applied as the claim related to conduct in previous proceedings.
Facts
The claimant brought claims of harassment related to race and sex, data breach, and whistleblowing against two respondents. She had previously been ordered to pay a deposit in relation to the harassment claims following a preliminary hearing on 4 June 2025. The claimant withdrew the data breach claim in May 2025, the whistleblowing claim in June 2025, and the harassment claims in June 2025. The claimant attempted to suggest there was a victimisation claim relating to the respondents' conduct during previous proceedings, but this had not been properly pleaded in her original claim form.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the withdrawn harassment claims under rule 51. The tribunal found that no claim of victimisation had been properly made and no application to amend had been submitted. Even if such a claim existed, it would have been struck out as having no prospects of success because the constituent elements of victimisation were not established and the principle of judicial proceedings immunity would apply. The entire claim was dismissed.
Practical note
A claimant cannot resurrect a dismissed claim by attempting to reformulate it as a different type of claim without making a formal application to amend, and claims relating to conduct in the course of previous litigation may be barred by judicial proceedings immunity.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8000744/2025
- Decision date
- 22 September 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No