Cases8000945/2024

Claimant v Scottish Police Authority

9 January 2026Before Employment Judge A KempScotlandon papers

Outcome

Claimant fails

Facts

This is a reconsideration application following a judgment issued on 17 December 2025. The claimant had been represented by solicitors and counsel at the full merits hearing but became self-represented after her solicitors withdrew. She applied for reconsideration by emails dated 18, 22 and 30 December 2025, seeking to challenge credibility findings and introduce new evidence.

Decision

The tribunal refused the reconsideration application at the sift stage under Rule 70(2). The judge found no reasonable prospect of the judgment being varied or revoked. The claimant was essentially seeking to re-argue credibility issues from the hearing and introduce new evidence that could have been obtained with reasonable diligence, failing the Ladd v Marshall test.

Practical note

Reconsideration applications must meet a high threshold and cannot be used to re-litigate matters or introduce evidence that could have been obtained for the original hearing.

Legal authorities cited

Serco Ltd v Wells [2016] ICR 768Liddington v 2Gether NHS Trust EAT/0002/16Shaw v Intellectual Property Office UKEAT/0186/20Ladd v Marshall [1954] 3 All ER 745Wileman v Minilec Engineering Ltd [1988] IRLR 144Outasight VB Ltd v Brown UKEAT/0253/14Gourlay v West Dunbartonshire Council [2025] EAT 29

Case details

Case number
8000945/2024
Decision date
9 January 2026
Hearing type
reconsideration
Hearing days
Classification
procedural

Respondent

Sector
public sector
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Claimant representation

Represented
No