Ako v. Rothschild Asset Management Ltd & Anor [2001] UKEAT 103_00_0802 (8 February 2001)

Ako v. Rothschild Asset Management Ltd & Anor [2001] UKEAT 103_00_0802 (8 February 2001)

Barber is distinguishable; the dismissal of Ms Ako's first application was not a judicial determination for purposes of res judicata as there was no hearing, no respondent participation, no evidence of agreement, and no prejudice. The appeal is allowed and the case remitted for hearing on the merits.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] UKEAT 103_00_0802
Parties
Appellant: Kate Ako; First Respondent: Rothschild Asset Management Ltd; Second Respondent: Boston Safe Deposit & Trust Company Ltd
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
08 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Full Hearing on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Estoppel, Withdrawal of Claim, Unfair Dismissal, Racial Discrimination, Transfer of Undertakings (tupe)
Employment Law Discrimination Law Res Judicata Estoppel Withdrawal of Claim Unfair Dismissal Racial Discrimination Transfer of Undertakings (tupe)

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kate Ako

Appellant

Rothschild Asset Management Ltd

First Respondent

Boston Safe Deposit & Trust Company Ltd

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Full Hearing on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does dismissal of an application upon withdrawal constitute a judicial determination for purposes of res judicata?
  2. 2 Is Barber v Staffordshire County Council applicable to unilateral withdrawal and dismissal without a hearing?
  3. 3 Can Ms Ako pursue claims after withdrawing her first application and having it dismissed?

Ratio Decidendi

Barber is distinguishable; the dismissal of Ms Ako's first application was not a judicial determination for purposes of res judicata as there was no hearing, no respondent participation, no evidence of agreement, and no prejudice. The appeal is allowed and the case remitted for hearing on the merits.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Case remitted for hearing on the merits
  • Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal granted