A v B, the Organisation & Ors

A v B, the Organisation & Ors

The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in refusing to vary or set aside the Restricted Reporting and Anonymisation Order, as there was no material change in circumstances and no cogent evidence of reduced risk; the balancing exercise had already been conducted and challenges to the original RRO were found unarguable by higher courts.

Parties
Appellant: A; Respondent: Organisation; Respondent: C; Respondent: D
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Restricted Reporting Order, Anonymisation, Open Justice, Case Management, Material Change in Circumstances
Employment Law Practice and Procedure Restricted Reporting Order Anonymisation Open Justice Case Management Material Change in Circumstances

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A

Appellant

Organisation

Respondent

C

Respondent

D

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Judge erred in law in refusing to set aside or vary a permanent Restricted Reporting and Anonymisation Order
  2. 2 Whether the Employment Judge erred in refusing to review that decision

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal did not err in law in refusing to vary or set aside the Restricted Reporting and Anonymisation Order, as there was no material change in circumstances and no cogent evidence of reduced risk; the balancing exercise had already been conducted and challenges to the original RRO were found unarguable by higher courts.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeals against the refusal of revocation Order and the refusal of review letter are rejected.
  • The issue of a Restricted Reporting Order in the fourth claim is remitted to Employment Judge Hutchinson unless not available, with the EAT RRO holding the line in the meantime.