Claimant v Dionard Guest House Limited
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal applied the res judicata doctrine because substantially the same complaints had already been decided and dismissed by EJ Hosie in claim number 801727/2024. The claim was struck out under rule 38(1)(a) as having no reasonable prospect of success and under rule 38(1)(b) as being unreasonably brought. Additionally, the fundamental issue of employee or worker status was res judicata from the previous judgment, and all complaints were outside statutory time limits.
Facts
Mr Zima brought a claim against Dionard Guest House Limited which substantially replicated complaints he had previously brought in claim number 801727/2024 which had been dismissed by EJ Hosie. The tribunal found that the fundamental issue of employee or worker status had already been determined against the claimant in the previous proceedings. The current complaints were also brought outside applicable statutory time limits.
Decision
The tribunal struck out the entire claim under rule 38(1)(a) and (b) on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success and was unreasonably brought due to the res judicata doctrine. The tribunal also found it had no jurisdiction due to the claims being out of time. Although the threshold for awarding expenses was crossed, the tribunal exercised its discretion not to award them after considering the claimant's financial means.
Practical note
Claimants cannot relitigate the same issues by bringing successive claims - the res judicata doctrine prevents abuse of process and tribunals will strike out such claims even where the claimant is unrepresented.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 8001250/2025
- Decision date
- 16 July 2025
- Hearing type
- strike out
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- solicitor
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No