DHL Supply Chain Ltd

Case Summary

This is a reconsideration application of a judgment dated 23 February 2026 in which the tribunal dismissed the claimant's constructive unfair dismissal complaint as not well-founded. The claimant sought reconsideration arguing the tribunal's findings contained factual contradictions regarding when a request for compassionate leave was made. The tribunal refused the application, finding it constituted an impermissible attempt to re-litigate matters already fully ventilated and properly argued at the original hearing.

The reconsideration application was refused because it constituted an attempt to re-litigate and reargue matters that had already been fully ventilated and properly argued at the original hearing, with no identifiable administrative error or new event occurring after the hearing that would require reconsideration in the interests of justice.

• •Whether constructive unfair dismissal claim was well-founded
• •Timing of compassionate leave request and employer's response
• •Factual contradiction regarding dates of leave requests

EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Aaron Mediratta Respondent: DHL Supply Chain Ltd JUDGMENT The claimant’s application dated 20 March 2026 for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 10 March 2026 is refused. REASONS 1. This is the preliminary consideration of the claimant’s application for reconsideration of the judgment sent to the parties on 23 February 2026. That judgment determined that the claimant’s complaint of constructive unfair dismissal was not well-founded and so was dismissed. 2. The claimant’s application was made by means of a letter attached to an email dated 20 March 2026. 3. Such an application falls to be considered under Rules 68 to 70. Rule 69 provides that an application for reconsideration must be made within 14 days of the date on which the written record (or, if later, the written reasons) were sent to the parties. Here, the claimant’s application was received within the relevant time limit. 4. By rule 68, the Tribunal may reconsider any judgment where it is necessary in the interests of justice to do so and, if it decides to do so, may vary, revoke or confirm the original decision. There is single threshold for making an application. That is that reconsideration is necessary in the interests of justice. There must therefore be something about the nature of how the decision was reached, either substantively or procedurally, from which the interests of justice would be offended if the original decision was allowed to stand. 5. By rule 70 I am to give an initial consideration to the prospects of the application determining whether it is necessary to seek the views of the respondent and whether the matter can be dealt with on paper or at a further hearing before the same tribunal. Where the application can be said to carry no reasonable prospects of being varied or revoked, the rules dictate that I sh…