Case 1311152/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Lisa Welborn v Garden Market Butchers West Brom Ltd (in voluntary liquidation) — 2021
- Case reference
- 1311152/2020
- Decision date
- 24 May 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Codd Appearances
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Lisa Welborn
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Lisa Welborn was employed by the respondent as a food sales assistant from 6 October 2017 until her dismissal on 9 December 2020. She presented an ET1 on 10 December 2020, after engaging with ACAS, but it was rejected because of a material error. The corrected claim was later accepted and issued on 24 May 2021, by which time it was approximately two months out of time.
The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence that the defect in the original ET1 was a genuine mistake. It found that she corrected the error as soon as practicable once it was identified and that the explanation for the defect was reasonable, taking into account that she was unrepresented. The tribunal also noted that the ET1 had been served at the respondent's registered office and that, despite the error in the identity of the respondent, it would have been obvious what the claim related to.
Balancing the hardship to the claimant if the application were refused against the respondent's position, the tribunal held that it would be unjust to end the proceedings on the basis of the ET1 error. It found that it was just and equitable to extend time, granted the claimant's application, and stated that the tribunal therefore had jurisdiction for the matter to proceed to a final hearing. The underlying merits of the employment claim were not decided in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Procedural ruling only: the tribunal granted an extension of time to rely on the ET1 and held the case could proceed; the underlying unfair dismissal claim was not determined at this hearing. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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.