Ms L Hedger v British Deaf Association: 3318925/2019
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 15 August 2022 |
| Date | 15 August 2022 |
| Published date | 25 August 2022 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Citation | 3318925/2019 |
| Subject Matter | Maternity and Pregnancy Rights |
Case No:3318925/2019
Page 1 of 5
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: Ms L Hedger
Respondent: British Deaf Association
JUDGMENT
The claimant’s application dated 31 March 2023 (updated on 17 April 2023) for
reconsideration of the judgment, sent to the parties on 8 April 2023 is refused as
it has no reasonable prospects of success.
REASONS
1. In that judgment, at paragraphs 5 to 12, the panel set out the applicable rules
and principles relating to reconsideration. I will not repeat what was said
there, but have taken it into account.
2. In summary, while reconsideration is possible, in appropriate circumstances,
there does have to be a good enough justification to overcome the fact that,
when issued, judgments are intended to be final (subject to appeal). As was
stated in Ebury Partners Uk Limited v Mr M Acton Davis Neutral Citation
Number: [2023] EAT 40
The employment tribunal can therefore only reconsider a decision if it is necessary
to do so “in the interests of justice.” A central aspect of the interests of justice is
that there should be finality in litigation. It is therefore unusual for a litigant to be
allowed a “second bite of the cherry” and the jurisdiction to reconsider should be
exercised with caution.
The Claimant’s application
3. The Claimant (via her husband and representative) submitted emails dated
31 March and 17 April 2023, within the relevant time limit, seeking
reconsideration.
4. The first email was written before written reasons were sent to parties. The
first time I saw either of them, was on 25 May 2023 when both were referred
to me by the tribunal service.
5. I am sorry to read that some parts of what I was saying when giving our
judgment and reasons might not have been interpreted accurately at the time.
I do think that the parties and the interpreters were all made aware that they
could and should let any of the speakers know at any time if they were
To continue reading
Request your trial