Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Recruitment & retention
    • Wellbeing
    • Occupational Health
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise

Personnel Today

Register
Log in
Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Recruitment & retention
    • Wellbeing
    • Occupational Health
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise

Case lawEmployment lawHR practice

Notice of withdrawal cannot be set aside: Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust Court of Appeal

by Personnel Today 13 Sep 2006
by Personnel Today 13 Sep 2006

In Khan v Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust, the EAT held that rule 25 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2004 does not give a tribunal jurisdiction to set aside a notice of withdrawal of a claim.


The EAT distinguished between a claim that has been simply withdrawn, and a withdrawn claim that has also been dismissed. A claimant who has withdrawn their claim may issue new proceedings arising out of the same facts, whereas a claimant whose withdrawn claim has been dismissed may not.


Race claim


Dr Khan brought a claim of race discrimination after his application to the Professional Executive Committee of the Heywood and Middleton Primary Care Trust was refused. The trust claimed that as this position on the committee would not have made Kahn an employee of the trust, the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim. Khan subsequently withdrew his claim.


A short time later, Khan instructed different solicitors and asked the tribunal to set aside his earlier withdrawal, stating that the tribunal had discretion to do this under its management powers. At the same time, the trust applied to have the withdrawn claim dismissed. The tribunal refused both applications, although it awarded a costs order against Khan, stating that his notice to set aside the withdrawal claim had been unreasonable. He appealed.


Khan argued that if proceedings were not dismissed, then they could be continued, allowing him to proceed with his claim.


The EAT dismissed the appeal on the basis that rule 25 did not give the tribunal jurisdiction to set aside a notice of withdrawal and did not permit the claimant to change his mind. The EAT also upheld the costs order against Khan. The Court of Appeal upheld the decisions of both the tribunal and the EAT.


Key points




  • There is a difference between a withdrawal and a dismissal of proceedings.


  • The drafting in rule 25 is ambiguous, but this case confirms that once a claim has been withdrawn, it is at an end, and the tribunal cannot reinstate it.


  • If the respondent successfully applies to have a claim dismissed, the claimant cannot bring a fresh claim on the same or similar facts. If the claim is not dismissed, the claimant can bring a fresh claim on the same facts, as long as they are still within the limitation period for the claim.


What you should do




  • Apply for withdrawn claims to be dismissed within the 28-day time period set out in rule 25 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2004 so that these claims cannot be re-litigated.

Rating: Two out of five stars


Rating system


Sign up to our weekly round-up of HR news and guidance

Receive the Personnel Today Direct e-newsletter every Wednesday

OptOut
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Our rating system is designed to help busy HR professionals prioritise their reading. Each case is rated from one to five stars: the more essential it is that you know about it, the more stars it will have.


By Joe Glavina, legal director, and Phil Williams, associate, Addleshaw Goddard

Personnel Today

Personnel Today articles are written by an expert team of award-winning journalists who have been covering HR and L&D for many years. Some of our content is attributed to "Personnel Today" for a number of reasons, including: when numerous authors are associated with writing or editing a piece; or when the author is unknown (particularly for older articles).

previous post
Tories claim NHS to spend £172m on management consultants
next post
NHS trust deal to expand HR and payroll role

You may also like

Ministers extend liability for umbrella companies’ unpaid PAYE

18 Sep 2025

MPs reject Lords’ amendments to Employment Rights Bill

16 Sep 2025

Failure to prevent fraud: Only 29% training staff...

16 Sep 2025

Judge in Supreme Court ruling said he’d ‘take...

15 Sep 2025

Employment lawyers voice AI fears on tribunal claims

15 Sep 2025

Day one rights to make 86% more cautious...

14 Sep 2025

Employment Rights Bill U-turn unlikely, say legal experts

10 Sep 2025

Day one rights in the Employment Rights Bill...

10 Sep 2025

Bigger budgets, but greater scrutiny – welcome to...

9 Sep 2025

Personnel Today Awards 2025 shortlist: HR director of...

9 Sep 2025

  • Workplace health benefits need to be simplified SPONSORED | Long-term sickness...Read more
  • Work smart – stay well: Avoid unnecessary pain with centred ergonomics SPONSORED | If you often notice...Read more
  • Elevate your L&D strategy at the World of Learning 2025 SPONSORED | This October...Read more
  • How to employ a global workforce from the UK (webinar) WEBINAR | With an unpredictable...Read more

Personnel Today Jobs
 

Search Jobs

PERSONNEL TODAY

About us
Contact us
Browse all HR topics
Email newsletters
Content feeds
Cookies policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions

JOBS

Personnel Today Jobs
Post a job
Why advertise with us?

EVENTS & PRODUCTS

The Personnel Today Awards
The RAD Awards
Employee Benefits Live
Employee Benefits
Forum for Expatriate Management
Whatmedia

ADVERTISING & PR

Advertising opportunities
Features list 2025

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • Linkedin


© 2011 - 2025 DVV Media International Ltd

Personnel Today
  • Home
    • All PT content
  • Email sign-up
  • Topics
    • HR Practice
    • Employee relations
    • Learning & training
    • Pay & benefits
    • Recruitment & retention
    • Wellbeing
    • Occupational Health
    • HR strategy
    • HR Tech
    • The HR profession
    • Global
    • All HR topics
  • Legal
    • Case law
    • Commentary
    • Flexible working
    • Legal timetable
    • Maternity & paternity
    • Shared parental leave
    • Redundancy
    • TUPE
    • Disciplinary and grievances
    • Employer’s guides
  • AWARDS
    • Personnel Today Awards
    • The RAD Awards
  • Jobs
    • Find a job
    • Jobs by email
    • Careers advice
    • Post a job
  • Brightmine
    • Learn more
    • Products
    • Free trial
    • Request a quote
  • Webinars
  • Advertise