Case 1300000/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss N K Badhan v UK Finance & Business Solutions Ltd PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2020
- Case reference
- 1300000/2020
- Decision date
- 28 July 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Camp Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss N K Badhan
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing on the claimant’s applications to amend her existing wages claim. The claim form had originally been presented as a claim for wages only. The claimant said she had instructed solicitors to include unfair dismissal and holiday pay claims, but they had not done so. At the hearing the tribunal also considered an oral application to add Mr Basra Jr as a respondent, and an application to add the Estate of Mr Basra Snr as a respondent.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Application to amend to add this claim was refused. The tribunal held the application, made on 28 July 2020, was out of time because the dismissal took effect on 21 November 2019 and it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been included earlier. | Other | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Application to amend to add this claim was refused. The tribunal held it was outside the primary time limit and, applying the Dedman principle, it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been included in the original claim form. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Galilee v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis [2017] UKEAT 0207_16_2211
- Sheikholeslami v University of Edinburgh [2018] UKEAT 0014_17_0510
- Dedman principle
- not reasonably practicable
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.