Case 1600222/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Telecom Service Centres Ltd t/a Webhelp UK — 2022
- Case reference
- 1600222/2022
- Decision date
- 15 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Othen Representation
- Venue
- by CVP
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy in 2021 and brought an unfair dismissal claim. The preliminary issue was whether the unfair dismissal complaint was presented within the time limits in section 111(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which depended on identifying the effective date of termination. The claimant said the date was 30 September 2021, while the respondent said it was 31 August 2021.
The tribunal found that the final consultation meeting on 26 August 2021 did not give clear and unambiguous notice of termination on 31 August 2021. The meeting notes were not a verbatim account, the evidence about what was said was unclear, and other dates later provided by the respondent were inconsistent. The dismissal letter sent the same day stated that the claimant's employment would terminate on 30 September 2021, and the attached termination documents also used that date for continuous employment and the reference date.
The tribunal concluded that the claimant's effective date of termination under section 97(1) ERA was 30 September 2021. With the ACAS early conciliation extension, the unfair dismissal claim presented on 20 February 2022 was within time, so the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear it. The judgment also records that the claimant's disability discrimination claim had been withdrawn.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary issue only. The tribunal found the unfair dismissal complaint was presented in time and that it had jurisdiction to hear it; the merits of the unfair dismissal claim were not determined in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the claimant's disability discrimination claim had been withdrawn. | Withdrawn | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- section 111(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 207B Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 97(1) Employment Rights Act 1996
- Société Générale, London Branch v Geys [2013] IRLR 122
- Sandle v Adecco UK Ltd [2016] IRLR 941
- East London NHS Foundation Trust v O'Connor [2019] 10 WLUK 456
- not reasonably practicable
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.