Case 1600024/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Hughes v Mr J Mayhew & Mrs H Mayhew (trading as Jock’s Taxis) — 2024
- Case reference
- 1600024/2024
- Decision date
- 27 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Jenkins JUDGMENT
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Hughes
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dealt only with limitation for the Claimant’s holiday pay and notice pay claims. At an earlier preliminary hearing, it had been identified that those claims were presented outside the three-month time limit, while the redundancy payment claim was in time and would continue. Employment Judge S Jenkins considered the Claimant’s application to extend time on the papers, after the Claimant confirmed he was content for it to be determined without a hearing.
No evidence was produced, so the tribunal made no formal findings of fact. It proceeded on the basis that the Claimant’s employment ended on 23 July 2023, and that his final wages, including any accrued but untaken holiday, would have fallen due by 31 July 2023 at the latest. On that footing, ACAS early conciliation should have been started by 22 October 2023 for the notice pay claim and by 30 October 2023 for the holiday pay claim. In fact, the Claimant contacted ACAS on 18 December 2023, the early conciliation certificate was issued on 22 December 2023, and the claim form was presented on 6 January 2024.
In his application, the Claimant said he had not thought he needed to apply to the tribunal because he had been promised a redundancy payment, and that he contacted ACAS once it became clear that payment would not be made. He also referred to uncertainty about the Respondent’s status, but he did not say that he was unaware of tribunal time limits or procedure. Applying the reasonable practicability test, and referring to Dedman v British Building Engineering Appliances Limited and Porter v Bandridge Limited, the tribunal held that any ignorance of rights or time limits had to be reasonable.
The tribunal concluded that waiting for the anticipated payment was not a compelling excuse for the delay, and that any lack of awareness of the time limit was not reasonable given the general availability of information about Employment Tribunal claims. It therefore held that it had been reasonably practicable for the holiday pay and notice pay claims to have been brought in time, and dismissed both claims. The redundancy payment claim was not dismissed and was said to continue.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Dismissed as out of time under the three-month limit; tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to bring the claim in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim dismissed as out of time under the three-month limit calculated from the effective date of termination; tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to bring the claim in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- reasonably practicable test
- Dedman v British Building Engineering Appliances Limited
- Porter v Bandridge Limited
- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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.