Case 1803367/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms N Armitage v Ryan Simpson Limited and 1 other — 2022
- Case reference
- 1803367/2021
- Decision date
- 8 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Members
- Venue
- Leeds
- Panel members
- M Lewis, L Priestley
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms N Armitage
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing in Leeds before Employment Judge Lancaster with members M Lewis and L Priestley, the tribunal first determined a preliminary issue on time limits. It dismissed the claims of unfair dismissal, breach of contract, unauthorised deductions from wages, and failure to pay accrued holiday pay against the second respondent because they were not brought in time, finding that it would have been reasonably practicable to present them in time and that they were not presented within a reasonable time thereafter.
The tribunal treated the failure to make reasonable adjustments claim as out of time as well, but held that it was just and equitable to extend the time for presentation until 2 July 2021, so that claim proceeded to the merits. The record identifies this as the outstanding discrimination claim and the case therefore involved disability discrimination issues.
After the merits hearing, all subsisting substantive claims against both respondents were dismissed. The written judgment records no monetary award and notes that the claimant's costs application was adjourned to be considered on the papers after further written representations.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on the preliminary issue as not brought in time; the tribunal said it would have been reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and that it was not presented within a reasonable time thereafter. The written judgment also records that all subsisting substantive claims were later dismissed after the merits hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed on the preliminary issue as not brought in time; the tribunal said it would have been reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and that it was not presented within a reasonable time thereafter. The written judgment also records that all subsisting substantive claims were later dismissed after the merits hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed on the preliminary issue as not brought in time; the tribunal said it would have been reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and that it was not presented within a reasonable time thereafter. The written judgment also records that all subsisting substantive claims were later dismissed after the merits hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed on the preliminary issue as not brought in time; the tribunal said it would have been reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and that it was not presented within a reasonable time thereafter. The written judgment also records that all subsisting substantive claims were later dismissed after the merits hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.