Ghoznovi v London Underground Ltd (Practice and Procedure : Striking-out/dismissal) [2013] UKEAT 0104_13_0911 (09 November 2013)

Ghoznovi v London Underground Ltd (Practice and Procedure : Striking-out/dismissal) [2013] UKEAT 0104_13_0911 (09 November 2013)

The appeal succeeds because the claimant did not intend to abandon the claim and withdrawal was due to lack of jurisdiction; therefore, it was unjust to dismiss the claim under rule 25(4), and the order should record the claim as withdrawn, not dismissed.

Citation
[2013] UKEAT 0104_13_0911
Parties
Claimant: Mr Ghoznovi; First Respondent: London Underground Ltd; Second Respondent: Transport for London Pension Scheme
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
09 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Employment Tribunal Appeal / Appeal From Pre Hearing Review and Review Application
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Striking Out, Withdrawal of Claims, Jurisdiction, Dismissal of Claims, Abuse of Process
Employment Law Civil Procedure Striking Out Withdrawal of Claims Jurisdiction Dismissal of Claims Abuse of Process

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Ghoznovi

Claimant

London Underground Ltd

First Respondent

Transport for London Pension Scheme

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Tribunal Appeal / Appeal From Pre Hearing Review and Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal properly dismissed the claim against the second Respondent upon withdrawal
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to dismiss the claim under rule 25(4)
  3. 3 Whether dismissal precludes the claimant from pursuing the claim in another forum

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal succeeds because the claimant did not intend to abandon the claim and withdrawal was due to lack of jurisdiction; therefore, it was unjust to dismiss the claim under rule 25(4), and the order should record the claim as withdrawn, not dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Order dismissing claim against second Respondent revoked
  • Judgment amended to record claim against Transport for London Pension Scheme as withdrawn, not dismissed