Case 2201886/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person (assisted by Ms. Griciciute) v Diana Herskovits — 2019
- Case reference
- 2201886/2019
- Decision date
- 3 December 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mason Representation
- Venue
- London Central
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person (assisted by Ms. Griciciute)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 29 November 2019 before Employment Judge Mason, with the claimant appearing in person and no attendance for the respondent, the tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the claim. It found that the claimant's employment ended on 3 August 2016, an Acas Early Conciliation Certificate was issued on 9 February 2017, and the claim was not presented until 8 May 2019, so it was presented out of time.
The tribunal also decided that it was not just and equitable to extend time. It found that the claimant had not shown that she was prevented from presenting the claim in time by illness or otherwise, and it said the claimant could not rely on any delay or negligence by Citizens Advice because that was attributable to her. In addition, the tribunal found that the Acas early conciliation requirements had not been complied with because the certificate named Esther Herskovits, the claim form named Diana Herskovits, who was deceased, and the claimant's employer was in fact Clear Lake Hotel Limited.
The claim was therefore struck out, after prior notice of possible strike out had been given on 25 September 2019. The written record notes that oral reasons were given at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to consider the claim because it was presented out of time and the Acas early conciliation requirements were not complied with. The judgment did not separately determine this head of claim on its merits. | Struck out | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to consider the claim because it was presented out of time and the Acas early conciliation requirements were not complied with. The judgment did not separately determine this head of claim on its merits. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- just and equitable extension of time
- Acas early conciliation scheme compliance
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.