Royal Mail Group Ltd

Case Summary

The claimant's application for reconsideration of a judgment sent on 18 March 2026 was refused. The tribunal found that the claimant failed to properly set out what protected act he relied upon and what detriment he suffered, making the same error in the original ET1. The tribunal noted the claimant also breached Rule 90 by failing to serve the respondent with the reconsideration application.

The claimant's reconsideration application failed to specify the protected act and detriment, repeating the same pleading deficiency from the original claim. There is no reasonable prospect of the original decision being varied or revoked.

• •whether claimant properly pleaded a protected act and detriment claim
• •procedural deficiency in application for reconsideration
• •failure to comply with Rule 90 in serving the respondent

The full source document is available from the official publication page.