Claimant v 0001 Capita Plc
Outcome
Individual claims
The tribunal considered the claimant's arguments regarding unfair dismissal fully at the December hearing and found them not well founded. The tribunal gave detailed reasons for its conclusions, finding no procedural irregularity or substantive unfairness in the dismissal process.
The tribunal considered the evidence and arguments relating to direct disability discrimination at the full merits hearing and concluded the claim was not well founded. The claimant did not demonstrate facts from which the tribunal could conclude that less favourable treatment occurred because of disability.
The tribunal considered the section 15 Equality Act claim at the full hearing in December 2024 and concluded it was not well founded. The tribunal found that either the alleged unfavourable treatment did not occur, or if it did, it was not because of something arising in consequence of disability, or was justified.
The tribunal upheld the respondents' material factor defence to the equal pay claim. The tribunal was satisfied that any difference in pay was due to a genuine material factor that was not the difference in sex between the claimant and her comparator.
Facts
Miss Stevens brought claims for unfair dismissal, disability discrimination (direct and arising from disability), and equal pay against Capita following her dismissal. A full merits hearing took place over seven days in December 2024 with a three-person tribunal panel. The claimant represented herself while the respondents were represented by counsel. The tribunal dismissed all claims. The claimant then applied for reconsideration, arguing procedural unfairness and challenging the tribunal's substantive findings.
Decision
Employment Judge Snelson refused the reconsideration application on the papers. The judge found the application essentially sought to re-litigate arguments already fully considered at the December hearing. There was no procedural irregularity or unfairness, and no reasonable prospect of the original judgment being varied or revoked. The judge emphasized the principle of finality in litigation and that reconsideration is not intended to give disappointed parties a second opportunity to argue their case.
Practical note
Reconsideration applications will be refused where they amount to no more than disagreement with the tribunal's decision and seek to re-argue points already fully ventilated at trial, absent procedural irregularity or fresh evidence meeting strict criteria.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 2214966/2023
- Decision date
- 10 January 2025
- Hearing type
- reconsideration
- Hearing days
- 7
- Classification
- procedural
Respondent
- Name
- 0001 Capita Plc
- Sector
- professional services
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No