Case 1801002/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D Phillips v John Cotton Group Limited PUBLIC PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2023
- Case reference
- 1801002/2023
- Decision date
- 15 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shepherd Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D Phillips
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a public preliminary hearing in Leeds by CVP on 15 May 2023 before Employment Judge Shepherd. The claimant, Mr D Phillips, appeared in person and the respondent, John Cotton Group Limited, was represented by solicitor Mr Warren-Jones.
The tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim and dismissed it. The reason given was that the claim was not presented to the tribunal before the end of three months beginning with the effective date of termination.
The tribunal also found that it was not satisfied that it had not been reasonably practicable for the claim to be presented within that time. No merits findings or monetary award were made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed at a public preliminary hearing for want of jurisdiction because the claim was not presented within three months beginning with the effective date of termination and the tribunal was not satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- three months beginning with the effective date of termination
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.