Cases6021748/2024

Claimant v Primark Stores Limited

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Otherdismissed on withdrawal

The claimant withdrew his claim with legal effect on two occasions and did not indicate he had not intended to withdraw. The tribunal found the withdrawal was legally effective and provided certainty. The claimant's subsequent change of mind upon receipt of new documents did not invalidate the prior withdrawal.

Facts

The claimant withdrew his claim against Primark on two occasions. He later sought to resume the claim after receiving documents in a separate claim against Total Security (case 6000201/2025), arguing he had changed his mind. The claimant, who was unrepresented and had depression and OCD, applied for reconsideration of the tribunal's judgment that his withdrawal was legally effective.

Decision

The tribunal refused the reconsideration application. Employment Judge Reid found no reasonable prospect of varying or revoking the original decision. The withdrawal was legally effective and the claimant's subsequent change of mind did not invalidate it. The Tribunal Rules 2024 do not provide a cooling-off period for withdrawals.

Practical note

A claimant's withdrawal of a claim is legally binding once made, and a subsequent change of mind, even upon receipt of new evidence, does not allow the claim to be reinstated.

Legal authorities cited

Case details

Case number
6021748/2024
Decision date
6 May 2025
Hearing type
reconsideration
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
Yes

Claimant representation

Represented
No