Case 1602897/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Shelley v Mr Lyndon Morgan and Mrs Rachel Morgan trading as Lyn Morgan furnishings — 2024
- Case reference
- 1602897/2023
- Decision date
- 22 April 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Aberystwyth
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Shelley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Aberystwyth on 17 April 2024 before Employment Judge R F Powell. The claimant, Mr R Shelley, appeared in person and was assisted by Ms A Metcalfe. The respondents were Mr Lyndon Morgan and Mrs Rachel Morgan trading as Lyn Morgan Furnishings, represented by Ms Sheerin of counsel.
The tribunal dismissed the claims of unfair dismissal, unlawful deductions from wages, and failure to pay accrued holiday pay. It found that each claim was not within the jurisdiction of the employment tribunal because the claims were presented after expiry of the relevant time limits, and that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented them in time.
The judgment was given orally at the hearing and recorded in writing on 17 April 2024, with the written record sent to the parties on 22 April 2024. No financial remedy was awarded. The note to the judgment states that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996 do not apply.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claim was presented after expiry of the relevant time limit when it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed because the claim was presented after expiry of the relevant time limit when it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed because the claim was presented after expiry of the relevant time limit when it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.