Case 2205589/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Silvia Ranera Robles v The Groucho Club — 2021
- Case reference
- 2205589/2020
- Decision date
- 14 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Nicklin Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Silvia Ranera Robles
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Silvia Ranera Robles brought claims for unpaid accrued annual leave under regulation 14(2) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and for breach of contract in respect of notice pay. The tribunal found that her employment ended on 18 June 2015, following her last day worked on 17 June 2015, and that the relevant final payment date was 10 July 2015. The claim was not presented until 21 August 2020.
The tribunal held that both complaints were substantially out of time. For the notice pay claim, the three-month time limit ran from 18 June 2015. For the annual leave claim, the three-month time limit ran from 10 July 2015. The tribunal identified 17 September 2015 and 9 October 2015 as the last dates for presentation, so the claims were many years late.
On the extension-of-time issue, the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for both complaints to have been presented in time. It relied on the fact that the claimant knew her employment had ended without notice, had asked for her statutory holiday entitlement at the termination meeting, knew she was missing payment when her July 2015 pay was lower than expected, and could have taken steps to find out how to bring a claim. The tribunal also noted that she did not seek legal advice, did not pursue the matter between November 2015 and June 2020, and had sufficient time to investigate her rights earlier.
The tribunal further held that, even if it had not been reasonably practicable to present the claims in time, the delay of more than four and a half years after expiry of the limitation periods was not a further reasonable period. It therefore held that it had no jurisdiction to hear either complaint and dismissed the claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the complaint was presented out of time and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it within the time limit; alternatively, any delay beyond time was not a further reasonable period. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the notice pay complaint was presented out of time and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it within the time limit; alternatively, any delay beyond time was not a further reasonable period. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- regulation 30(2)(b) Working Time Regulations 1998
- article 7 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
- Palmer and Saunders v Southend-on-Sea Borough Council [1984] IRLR 119
- Wall's Meat Co Ltd v Khan [1979] ICR 52
- reasonably practicable test
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.