Case 1305260/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Smith v Adept PHB Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 1305260/2020
- Decision date
- 16 April 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Noons Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Smith
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAfter reviewing the claim form and response, the tribunal converted the final hearing into a public preliminary hearing to decide whether some or all of the claimant's claims had been presented out of time. It found that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to submit his claims for unfair dismissal, breach of contract, unlawful deduction from wages and failure to provide a section 1 statement within the statutory time limits, taking into account the ACAS early conciliation provisions. Those claims were therefore out of time and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them.
The tribunal held that the claimant's claim for underpayment of statutory redundancy pay was submitted within time and was allowed to proceed. At the final hearing it found that claim well founded and ordered the respondent to pay £213.45.
The tribunal also recorded that the respondent's breach of contract claim succeeded, and it ordered the claimant to pay the respondent £85.38. No other remedy was recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claimant's unfair dismissal claim was found to have been presented out of time. The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been submitted within the statutory time limit, taking into account ACAS early conciliation, and that the tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claimant's breach of contract claim was also found to have been presented out of time. The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable to bring the claim within the time limit and that it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant's unlawful deduction from wages claim was found to have been presented out of time. The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable to present the claim within time and that it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claimant's claim for failure to provide a section 1 statement of terms and conditions was found to have been presented out of time. The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable to submit the claim within the statutory time limit and that it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The claimant's claim for underpayment of statutory redundancy pay was within time and was found well founded. The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant £213.45. |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £213
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- ACAS early conciliation provisions
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.