Kantar UK Ltd

Case Summary

The claimant applied for reconsideration of a judgment dismissing his claim following an Acas settlement in February 2020, claiming he lacked capacity at the time. The tribunal refused the reconsideration application on the basis that there was no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked, noting that once a claim is withdrawn it cannot be reinstated, and the medical evidence did not support the claim of incapacity in February 2020.

The tribunal refused the reconsideration application because: (1) under the Tribunal Rules of 2013, a withdrawn claim cannot be revived or reinstated; (2) even if the settlement were invalid, the claim could not be revived; and (3) the medical evidence did not support that the claimant lacked capacity in February 2020, as it only indicated mental health issues from October 2021 onwards.

• •Whether reconsideration application should be granted based on alleged lack of capacity at time of settlement
• •Whether claim could be revived after withdrawal
• •Whether sufficient evidence of incapacity provided

1 of 2 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Ross Hancher Respondent: Kantar UK Ltd RECONSIDERATION JUDGMENT In accordance with rule 70(2) of The Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024, the Claimant’s reconsideration application is refused because the Tribunal considers there to be no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked. REASONS 1. The Claimant emailed the Tribunal on 8 February 2026 applying for reconsideration of what he says was a judgment dismissing this claim upon withdrawal following a settlement through Acas of 7 February 2020. 2. The age of this case means the Tribunal no longer has any paperwork relating to it, including any such judgment. All that can be seen from the Tribunal’s electronic systems is that a case with the case number the Claimant has provided for this case (1300614/2019) was linked by the Tribunal to what appears to be another claim he brought against the Respondent (case number 1307341/2019), which was rejected by the Tribunal. Nevertheless, I assume for the purposes of making this decision that the Claimant is right about the judgment’s existence. 3. The basis of the Claimant’s reconsideration application is that he lacked capacity “At the time the settlement was reached and the COT3 was signed”. His explanation for his delay in applying for reconsideration is: “I have been unable to bring this application sooner due to the severity of my health issues, continued recovery from sepsis, and the failings of my previous legal representative. I ask the Tribunal to exercise its discretion to extend the time limit for this application, as it was not reasonably practicable to apply sooner.” 4. On 9 February 2026, the Claimant emailed the Tribunal a letter from a GP dated 25 September 2025, stating that the letter confirms, “that my mental health has prevented me from managing my affairs since 2021”. 5. I refuse the reco…