Case 1806735/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr D King v Kingston upon Hull City Council Heard at Sheffield by video — 2025
- Case reference
- 1806735/2024
- Decision date
- 6 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brain REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Sheffield
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr D King
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 1 May 2025 before Employment Judge Brain, the Tribunal considered Mr D King's complaint of constructive unfair dismissal against Kingston upon Hull City Council. The Tribunal found that the claim was presented outside the limitation period in section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and that it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time.
On that basis, the Tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the complaint. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | Preliminary hearing limitation issue. The Tribunal held the claim was presented outside the limitation period in section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and that it was reasonably practicable for it to have been presented in time, so the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider it. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.