Case 2402333/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Tarbatt v Manchester Airport plc — 2021
- Case reference
- 2402333/2021
- Decision date
- 1 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Franey
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Tarbatt
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the claimant's notice pay complaint could not succeed because she had been paid in lieu of notice. That complaint was withdrawn at the hearing and dismissed on that basis.
On the unfair dismissal complaint, the tribunal found that employment ended on 14 October 2020 and that, applying the statutory minimum notice provisions, the effective date of termination for unfair dismissal purposes was 28 October 2020. After the effect of early conciliation was taken into account, the last date for presenting the claim was 15 February 2021. The claim was not lodged until 10 March 2021.
The tribunal accepted the claimant's evidence about the advice she received from union representatives, including incorrect advice about timing, but held that it was nevertheless reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time. It found that timely advice could reasonably have been given after the appeal outcome, and that the claimant could reasonably have made enquiries herself, including through ACAS, to ascertain the relevant time limits. The tribunal also stated that, even if timely presentation had not been reasonably practicable, the claim was not brought within a further reasonable period.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The notice pay complaint was withdrawn after the claimant accepted she had been paid in lieu of notice. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the claim was presented out of time and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
10 references- section 111(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 207B Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 97(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 86 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Marks and Spencer Plc v Williams-Ryan
- Palmer v Southend-on-Sea Borough Council
- Bodha v Hampshire Area Health Authority
- Trevelyans (Birmingham) Ltd v Norton
- Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd
- Northamptonshire County Council v Entwhistle
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.