Case 2212673/2023 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2212673/2023
- Decision date
- 19 December 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 12 December 2023 before Tribunal Judge McGrade, the tribunal considered the claimant's claims for unfair dismissal, wrongful dismissal, and unlawful deduction from wages. The respondent was represented by R Bhatt, counsel, and the claimant appeared in person.
All three claims were dismissed on limitation grounds. The tribunal found that the claims had been presented outside the applicable three-month time limits: section 111(2)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for unfair dismissal, Article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 for wrongful dismissal, and section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 for unlawful deduction from wages. In each instance, the tribunal held that it had been reasonably practicable for the claimant to present the claim within time.
The decision records that reasons were given orally at the hearing, and that written reasons would be provided only if requested within 14 days of the decision being sent to the parties. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claim was presented outside the three months' time limit in section 111(2)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Dismissed because the claim was presented outside the three months' time limit in Article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 and the tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed because the claim was presented outside the three months' time limit in section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 111(2)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996
- Article 7 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
- section 23 Employment Rights Act 1996
- reasonably practicable
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.