The Claimant was dismissed in January 2019 and she appealed, initially stating that she wished to be reinstated back into her original position. She later said she did not want to work for the Respondent any more and wanted an apology and compensation. The appeal was successful and she was reinstated but she did not return to work. She was dismissed in July 2019. Her claim for unfair dismissal (for the January 2019 dismissal) was dismissed as the ET agreed that the dismissal had 'disappeared' as her appeal was successful. They rejected her argument that she had withdrawn from the appeal, saying that at no stage did the Claimant withdraw her appeal. There was evidence that Acas had advised her to see her appeal through, and that she followed that advice. The Claimant was asked by the ET whether or not she withdrew her appeal at this stage and she unequivocally confirmed that she had not. The Claimant appealed, contending that on an objective construction her statement that she did not want to work for the Respondent meant that she was withdrawing from the appeal. Th Respondent contended that the Claimant was required to state, in terms, that she wished to withdraw from the appeal, if she wanted to avoid reinstatement being the automatic consequence should the appeal succeed.

The EAT dismissed the appeal. On an objective analysis of the words she used, the Claimant stated that she did not want to return to work for the Respondent rather than that she wanted to withdraw her appeal. Without requiring an excessive level of formality, she could have said “I withdraw my appeal”, if that had been what she wanted to do. The Claimant told the ET that she had not withdrawn her appeal because she believed that Acas had advised her not to do so. The ET accepted her evidence and found as a fact that the appeal had not been withdrawn.