Claimant v Bournemouth University
Outcome
Individual claims
The claim was struck out at a preliminary hearing on 12 December 2024 as having no reasonable prospect of success. The claimant's reconsideration application was dismissed, with the tribunal finding no new points raised that would alter the original decision to strike out.
The public interest disclosure detriment claims were struck out at a preliminary hearing on 12 December 2024 as having no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal found the claimant made no attempt to link particular detriments to any disclosure or establish respondent responsibility, and many detriments preceded the alleged disclosures. Reconsideration was refused.
An automatic unfair dismissal claim was added to the proceedings by EJ Livesey but the outcome of this claim is not addressed in this reconsideration judgment, which deals only with sex discrimination and whistleblowing detriment claims.
Facts
Dr Kear brought claims of sex discrimination and public interest disclosure detriment against Bournemouth University. The claims were struck out at a preliminary hearing on 12 December 2024 as having no reasonable prospect of success. The claimant applied for reconsideration, submitting lengthy written arguments alleging a wide-ranging conspiracy involving the respondent. The claimant asserted that disclosure would reveal the truth of his allegations, including the identity of 'Sasha Folkes', and that the strike-out was premature.
Decision
Employment Judge Cadney dismissed the reconsideration application. The judge found that the claimant's submissions raised no new points that were not already considered at the original hearing, and simply repeated his belief in a conspiracy. The tribunal confirmed the original decision to strike out the sex discrimination and whistleblowing claims, finding the application did not satisfy the interests of justice test for reconsideration.
Practical note
Reconsideration applications that merely repeat arguments already considered and rejected, without identifying procedural irregularity or new evidence, will not satisfy the interests of justice test and will be dismissed in line with the principle of finality of litigation.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 1406160/2023
- Decision date
- 14 April 2025
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- education
- Represented
- No
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No