Case 2401024/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr I Whittaker v Ribble Roofs Ltd (in Voluntary Liquidation) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2401024/2019
- Decision date
- 10 November 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ross REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr I Whittaker
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Whittaker brought a claim for a redundancy payment against Ribble Roofs Ltd (in Voluntary Liquidation). The tribunal noted that his employment had ended on 26 April 2019 and that the claim was presented on 10 February 2020, so it was out of time on the face of it.
The tribunal held that it was just and equitable pursuant to section 164(3) Employment Rights Act 1996 to extend the time limit for presentation of the redundancy payment claim. On that basis, the tribunal accepted jurisdiction to determine the claim.
The tribunal then awarded a redundancy payment of £4,716.63. The judgment records the calculation as nine years' complete service multiplied by 1.5 and gross pay of £349.38.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal extended time under section 164(3) Employment Rights Act 1996 on the basis that it was just and equitable to do so, because the claim presented on 10 February 2020 was outside the normal time limit after employment ended on 26 April 2019. | Upheld | — | £4,717 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £4,717
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 164(3) Employment Rights Act 1996
- just and equitable 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.