Case 1807183/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Dunn (counsel) For the v Force Shield Security Facilities Management Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1807183/2019
- Decision date
- 3 February 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Davies Appearances
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Dunn (counsel) For the
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant brought a complaint under Regulation 12 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006. The Respondent did not attend the hearing, which was held in Leeds before Employment Judge Davies on 3 February 2020.
The Tribunal found that the complaint was not presented within three months of the date of the relevant transfer. It also found that it was reasonably practicable to present the complaint within that period. On that basis, the Tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the complaint.
The claim was therefore dismissed. The written record states that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer of undertakings (TUPE) | The complaint under Regulation 12 of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 was not presented within three months of the relevant transfer. The Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to do so, so it had no jurisdiction and dismissed the complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.