Claimant v Downton Parish Council
Outcome
Individual claims
This is a reconsideration application which was refused. The original claim details are not provided in this judgment, but references to 'being said by one Councillor to lie in the extreme' and 'threatened with dismissal at the end of the mediation process' suggest harassment/detriment claims that failed in the original hearing.
Facts
This is a reconsideration judgment. The Claimant worked for Downton Parish Council and brought claims that included allegations about being called a liar by a Councillor during an investigation and being threatened with dismissal following mediation. The original judgment dated 20 March 2025 dismissed her claims. The Claimant applied for reconsideration on two grounds: that counsel and a councillor made statements contradicting evidence about disclosure expectations during investigation, and that the tribunal incorrectly stated the SWC Report concluded there were grounds for disciplinary investigation.
Decision
Employment Judge Lambert refused the reconsideration application. Ground 1 was rejected because it was never part of the pleaded case before the tribunal. Ground 2 was rejected as an attempt to relitigate matters already considered, where the judge had preferred other witnesses' evidence over the Claimant's and the challenged statement was a reasonable paraphrase of the SWC Report's conclusions.
Practical note
Reconsideration applications cannot introduce new allegations that were not part of the original pleaded case, and unsuccessful parties cannot use reconsideration to relitigate credibility findings or challenge reasonable paraphrasing of evidence already properly considered by the tribunal.
Legal authorities cited
Case details
- Case number
- 1400672/2023
- Decision date
- 20 March 2025
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- —
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Sector
- public sector
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No