Case 1302933/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Kedwards v Amey Services Limited Heard: in private by CVP — 2022
- Case reference
- 1302933/2021
- Decision date
- 25 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Codd Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Kedwards
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr G Kedwards did not attend the hearing and was not represented. The respondent was represented by Mr Haines. Employment Judge Codd heard the case in private by CVP on 25 January 2022.
The tribunal dealt with the claimant’s unfair dismissal and unpaid wages claims together. It held that both claims were presented out of time. The claimant had not established that it was not reasonably practicable to submit the claims within the relevant time limit, nor that they were subsequently submitted within a reasonable period.
On that basis, the tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims. It also recorded that the claimant had failed to actively pursue the case. The judgment states that the claims were struck out and dismissed.
No monetary remedy was awarded and the written record states that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said the unfair dismissal claim was presented out of time, that the claimant had not shown it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time or that it was then presented within a reasonable period, and that the tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to hear it. It also recorded failure to actively pursue the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal grouped the unpaid wages claim with the unfair dismissal claim and struck both out and dismissed them for being out of time, for failure to show it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and for failure to actively pursue the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
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.