Case 1802629/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Bramhall v Connect Housing Association limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1802629/2020
- Decision date
- 11 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Bramhall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr J Bramhall brought a complaint that he had been unfairly dismissed by Connect Housing Association Ltd. Employment Judge Brain, sitting alone at Sheffield by CVP on 5 February 2020, recorded that the complaint was presented outside the time limit in section 111(2)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented the complaint within the statutory time limit. It also found that, in any event, the complaint was not presented within a reasonable time. On that basis, the tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the unfair dismissal complaint.
The judgment therefore dismissed the unfair dismissal claim without reaching the merits of the dismissal itself and recorded no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the complaint was presented outside the time limit in section 111(2)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, that it was reasonably practicable to present it in time, and that it was not presented within a reasonable time in any event. It therefore had no jurisdiction to consider the unfair dismissal complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 111(2)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996
- reasonably practicable
- reasonable time
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.