Case 2302897/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R J Robalino v The NLP Academy Limited OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2022
- Case reference
- 2302897/2020
- Decision date
- 20 January 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Rourke Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R J Robalino
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Robalino brought claims of unfair dismissal, unlawful deductions from wages, failure to provide pay in lieu of notice, a redundancy payment, and other payments. The tribunal recorded an agreed effective date of termination of 10 January 2020, so the ordinary three-month time limit expired on 9 April 2020. Early Conciliation was not started until 9 June 2020 and the ET1 was not presented until 12 July 2020, which was approximately three months late.
The tribunal applied s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996 and referred to Wall's Meat Co Ltd v Khan and Porter v Bandridge Ltd. It found that it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been brought in time. The claimant said that COVID-19 lockdowns in Spain and England, his girlfriend's pregnancy, and later alleged settlement discussions explained the delay, but the tribunal gave little weight to the settlement point because it was raised only in cross-examination and was unsupported by evidence.
The tribunal also found that the claimant was IT-literate, had lived and worked in the UK for about two years, and could have completed the ET1 in a couple of hours. It held that the first lockdown only began in late March 2020, so it did not explain delay before then, and there was no medical evidence about his girlfriend's health. On his own evidence, he had decided by late February 2020 that he was going to bring a claim, but he still did not file it by 9 April 2020. All claims were therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction, and previous orders, including the unless order of 24 June 2021, were set aside.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the claim was presented out of time; the tribunal made no merits finding. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the claim was presented out of time; the tribunal made no merits finding. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment describes this as a claim for failure to provide pay in lieu of notice; it was dismissed for want of jurisdiction because it was out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Dismissed for want of jurisdiction because the claim was presented out of time; the tribunal made no merits finding. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Dismissed for want of jurisdiction; the judgment refers only to 'other payments' and does not specify the underlying entitlement. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Wall's Meat Co Ltd v Khan
- Porter v Bandridge Ltd
- 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.