Case 2304988/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C C Eze v ISS Facility Services Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2304988/2023
- Decision date
- 5 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McAvoy Newns
- Venue
- London South
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C C Eze
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal amended the respondent's name to ISS Facility Services Limited with the parties' consent.
The claimant's claims for unfair dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages were presented outside the normal time limit prescribed by the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for the claims to have been presented within those time limits and did not exercise discretion to consider them. The claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was dismissed because it was presented outside the normal time limit under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it within time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Described in the judgment as an unauthorised deductions from wages claim. It was dismissed because it was presented outside the normal time limit under the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it within time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.