Case 2203420/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In Person v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 2203420/2020
- Decision date
- 26 October 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr David Mapfumo began employment with Great Western Railway on 16 January 2012 and transferred to First Group Holdings Ltd on 4 July 2016. He was appointed Senior Group Internal Auditor on 1 March 2019 and was summarily dismissed for gross misconduct on 2 October 2019. At the preliminary hearing the tribunal held that First Group Holdings Ltd was the correct respondent.
The hearing was confined to limitation. The claimant contacted ACAS on 11 May 2020, received a certificate on 21 May, and presented his ET1 on 9 June 2020. Applying s.111(2) ERA 1996 and the authorities of Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea BC and Bodha v Hampshire Area Health Authority, the tribunal found the unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims were out of time. It accepted that he had health and domestic difficulties, but found the evidence did not show it was not reasonably practicable to present the claims in time, and that the further delay after he knew on 6 February 2020 that the internal appeal had failed was not reasonable.
The race discrimination complaint was also out of time under s.123 EqA 2010. The tribunal applied the just and equitable test and Robertson v Bexley Community Centre, noted that the ET1 contained no substantive particulars, and refused to extend time. The claimant's redundancy and arrears of pay claims were withdrawn, and the tribunal also treated the outstanding holiday pay claim as outside time limits. It noted there might have been a dispute about holiday entitlement, but declined to determine it because jurisdiction was lacking.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Withdrawn by the claimant at the hearing. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Arrears of pay claim withdrawn after the claimant accepted an earlier effective date of termination. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed as out of time under s.111(2) ERA 1996; the tribunal found it was reasonably feasible to present the claim in time and refused an extension. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Notice pay claim to the extent it depended on wrongful dismissal; dismissed as out of time under s.111(2) ERA 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed as out of time under s.123 EqA 2010; the ET1 contained no substantive particulars of the complaint. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Holiday pay | Holiday pay claim dismissed as out of time; the tribunal noted there might have been a dispute about entitlement but did not determine the amount. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.111(2) ERA 1996
- Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea BC
- Bodha (Vishnudut) v Hampshire Area Health Authority
- s.123 EqA 2010
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre
- Anyanwu v South Bank Student Union
- Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust
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.