Case 2301466/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v APHA Weybridge — 2022
- Case reference
- 2301466/2022
- Decision date
- 25 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Webster Appearances
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr Charles Duncan, applied for reconsideration of the rejection of his breach of contract claim. Employment Judge Webster heard the application at London South Employment Tribunal on 25 November 2022. The respondent, APHA Weybridge, did not attend.
The tribunal did not uphold the application. It held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear a breach of contract claim brought while the claimant was still employed. The judgment cites Article 3 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 as the relevant jurisdictional basis.
No monetary award was made, and the judgment records only the refusal of reconsideration and the jurisdictional reason for rejecting the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The tribunal refused reconsideration of the rejection of the claim and held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear a breach of contract claim brought while the claimant was still employed. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Article 3 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.