Case 1300412/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Respondent — 2024
- Case reference
- 1300412/2024
- Decision date
- 14 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Harding Dated
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a public preliminary hearing on 14 November 2024, Employment Judge Harding held that the claims of constructive unfair dismissal, unpaid holiday pay on termination of employment, and breach of contract arising from unpaid notice pay in respect of the termination of a secondment contract were out of time. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for those claims to have been presented in time, and accordingly it had no jurisdiction to deal with them; those claims were dismissed.
The tribunal also held that the disability discrimination claims were out of time. It found they had not been presented within such period as the tribunal considered just and equitable, so it had no jurisdiction to deal with them and they were dismissed.
By consent, the claimant’s claim for a redundancy payment was dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant. No monetary award was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Out of time; tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time and therefore it had no jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Out of time; tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time and therefore it had no jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Out of time; the claim concerned unpaid notice pay in respect of the termination of a secondment contract, and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for it to have been presented in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Out of time; the tribunal found the claims were not presented within such period as it considered just and equitable and therefore had no jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Redundancy | Dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant by consent. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.