Cases3201620/2024

Claimant v Amazon UK Services Limited

7 February 2025Before Employment Judge Mr G. KingLondon Easton papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalfailed

This was an application for reconsideration of a judgment dated 7 February 2025 dismissing the claimant's unfair dismissal claim. The tribunal had found the respondent acted reasonably in dismissing the claimant based on LENEL reports, applying the British Home Stores v Burchell test. The reconsideration was refused as the claimant's new evidence failed the Ladd v Marshall test and would not have changed the outcome.

Facts

The claimant was dismissed by Amazon based on LENEL system reports which she did not challenge at the time. Following a tribunal hearing on 7 February 2025 which dismissed her unfair dismissal claim, she applied for reconsideration on 25 February 2025, arguing the LENEL system contained errors. The original tribunal had found the respondent acted reasonably in relying on the LENEL reports when dismissing the claimant.

Decision

Employment Judge G. King refused the reconsideration application on the papers on 14 April 2025, finding no reasonable prospect of varying or revoking the original judgment. The purported new evidence failed the Ladd v Marshall test as it could have been obtained for the original hearing and would not have changed the outcome, given the tribunal's function was to assess whether the dismissal was reasonable under the Burchell test, not to determine the accuracy of the LENEL reports.

Practical note

Applications for reconsideration based on new evidence must satisfy the Ladd v Marshall test, and in unfair dismissal cases the tribunal assesses the reasonableness of the employer's conduct at the time of dismissal, not whether the employer's factual findings were objectively correct.

Legal authorities cited

BHS v Burchell [1978] IRLR 379Ladd v Marshall [1954] 3 All ER 745Outasight VB Ltd v Brown [2015] ICR D11Trimble v Supertravel Ltd [1982] ICR 440Fforde v Black EAT 68/80Williams v Ferrosan Ltd [2004] IRLR 607Newcastle Upon Tyne City Council v Marsden [2010] IRLR 743

Statutes

ET Procedure Rules 2024 Rule 68ET Procedure Rules 2024 Rule 69ET Procedure Rules 2024 Rule 70

Case details

Case number
3201620/2024
Decision date
7 February 2025
Hearing type
reconsideration
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
retail
Represented
No

Claimant representation

Represented
No