Case 1803625/2018 · Employment Tribunal
In person with assistance from Mr Yates For the v Mr C Ridley (solicitor) — 2019
- Case reference
- 1803625/2018
- Decision date
- 12 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person with assistance from Mr Yates For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs H Yates's employment terminated on 29 August 2004. In the judgment dated 12 December 2019, Employment Judge Davies recorded that the hearing took place in Leeds with the claimant appearing in person with assistance from Mr Yates and the respondents represented by Mr C Ridley of Aviva's solicitors.
The Tribunal held that the claimant's claims of unfair dismissal, unauthorised deduction from wages, breach of contract, and pay in lieu of accrued holiday were not presented within the relevant time limits. The Tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable to present them in time, so it had no jurisdiction to hear those claims and dismissed them.
The Tribunal also held that the disability discrimination claims were not brought within the relevant time limits and were not brought within any further period that the Tribunal considered just and equitable. Those claims were therefore dismissed as well. The judgment records no merits findings and no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claim was not brought within the relevant time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so; the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed because the claim was not brought within the relevant time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so; the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed because the claim was not brought within the relevant time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so; the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim for pay in lieu of accrued holiday was dismissed because it was not brought within the relevant time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so; the Tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed because the disability discrimination claims were not brought within the relevant time limits and were not brought within any further period the Tribunal considered just and equitable. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.