Mrs M Plonska v Respondent — 2020

The tribunal first extended time for the claim under section 111(2)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and section 189(5)(c) of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. It accepted that the claimant had very limited English, did not understand the available claims, and was prevented from filing sooner by her mother's illness, her return to Poland, and her own ill health. It also converted the preliminary hearing into a final hearing under Rule 48 of the Employment Tribunal Rules.

The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed. The tribunal found that the claimant had been employed for about eight months and that she did not suggest any additional complaint about the reasons for the dismissal that took place on 10 December 2018. On that basis, it held that she lacked the necessary qualifying period to bring the unfair dismissal claim and that the claim was not well founded.

The protective award claim succeeded. The administrators' correspondence accepted that the workforce had been dismissed by reason of redundancy, that there had been no prior consultation, that the respondent was not party to any trade union recognition agreement, and that no steps had been taken to elect workplace representatives. No special circumstances were relied on. The tribunal awarded remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 10 December 2018 and stated that the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 1996 did not apply.