Case 1806804/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs AM Leska v Harvard Technology Limited (In Administration) AT A HEARING — 2020
- Case reference
- 1806804/2019
- Decision date
- 15 May 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs AM Leska
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing took place at Leeds by telephone conference call on 15 May 2020 before Employment Judge Lancaster. Mrs AM Leska appeared in person through an interpreter. Harvard Technology Limited, in administration, entered no appearance and did not attend.
The tribunal struck out the complaints of holiday pay and unfair dismissal. It found that those complaints were not presented in time and that it had been reasonably practicable for them to have been presented in time.
The tribunal reached a different conclusion on the protective award claim. It found that it was not reasonably practicable to have presented that claim in time and that it was presented within a reasonable time afterwards. The protective award claim therefore succeeded.
The respondent was ordered to pay the claimant remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 10 December 2018. No monetary figure was stated. The judgment recorded that regulations 6, 7 and 8 of the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 1996 applied, so payment of any award would be postponed pending any recoupment notice from the Secretary of State in respect of relevant benefits received by the claimant in the prescribed period.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | The complaint was not presented in time although it was reasonably practicable to have done so. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The complaint was not presented in time although it was reasonably practicable to have done so. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | Protective award claim. The tribunal ordered remuneration for a protected period of 90 days beginning on 10 December 2018, but no monetary figure was stated. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefit) Regulations 1996 regulations 6, 7 and 8
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.