Cases2403748/2024

Claimant v Lacura Care Services Ltd

Outcome

Other

Facts

This is a reconsideration application by the respondent, Lacura Care Services Ltd, challenging a judgment sent to the parties on 31 January 2025. The respondent sought reconsideration on the basis of alleged procedural failings, disagreement with the law applied, and case management decisions made by the judge at a hearing on 17 January 2025. The respondent's operations manager, Mr Thomson, represented the company at the hearing, while Ms Parvez represented the claimant.

Decision

Employment Judge Slater refused the respondent's application for reconsideration under rule 70(2) of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, finding no reasonable prospect of the judgment being varied or revoked. The judge concluded that the respondent's arguments amounted to disagreement with case management decisions and an attempt to re-litigate matters, and that there was no merit to claims of bias, lack of evidence, or misapplication of law.

Practical note

Reconsideration applications must meet a high threshold and cannot be used to re-litigate matters or challenge case management decisions made within the tribunal's discretion; the principle of finality in litigation is fundamental.

Legal authorities cited

Ministry of Justice v Burton [2016] EWCA Civ 714Flint v Eastern Electricity Board [1975] ICR 395Lindsay v Ironsides Ray and Vials [1994] ICR 384Liddington v 2Gether NHS Foundation Trust EAT/0002/16

Case details

Case number
2403748/2024
Decision date
22 January 2025
Hearing type
reconsideration
Hearing days
1
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
healthcare
Represented
No
Rep type
self

Claimant representation

Represented
No