Cases6019637/2024

Claimant v University of Liverpool

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherfailed

The claimant's application for reconsideration was refused on preliminary consideration. The tribunal found no reasonable prospect of the original decision (dismissing claims as out of time) being varied or revoked. The claimant did not attend the original hearing and could have made his arguments then or in written representations.

Facts

Dr Gamble brought claims against the University of Liverpool and Mr Blackburn. At a hearing on 13 June 2025, the tribunal dismissed his claims as out of time, finding it was not just and equitable to extend time. The claimant did not attend the hearing despite being given opportunity to do so or provide written representations. He subsequently applied for reconsideration, submitting medical documents he said should not be shared with the respondents. The tribunal noted the claimant could have made these arguments at the original hearing.

Decision

The tribunal refused the application for reconsideration on preliminary consideration under rule 70(2), finding no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. The judge found it was not necessary in the interests of justice to reconsider, emphasizing finality in litigation and that reconsideration is not an opportunity to make arguments that could have been made at the original hearing.

Practical note

A claimant cannot use a reconsideration application to make arguments they could have presented at the original hearing, particularly when they chose not to attend or provide written representations.

Legal authorities cited

Ministry of Justice v Burton [2016] EWCA Civ 714Ebury Partners UK v Davis [2023] IRLR

Case details

Case number
6019637/2024
Decision date
13 June 2025
Hearing type
reconsideration
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
education
Represented
Yes

Claimant representation

Represented
No