Case 2402760/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Nixon v GW Law Ltd t/a GW Legal — 2025
- Case reference
- 2402760/2025
- Decision date
- 29 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barker
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Nixon
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs J Nixon said she was dismissed on 13 December 2024, but she did not start ACAS Early Conciliation until 7 April 2025 and did not present her claim to the Tribunal until 22 July 2025. The tribunal held that the claims for holiday pay, notice pay and arrears of pay were all subject to the three-month time limit and were therefore out of time.
The tribunal rejected the claimant's explanation for the delay. It found that she was not required to wait until the respondent was wound up, and it also rejected her suggestion that the delay was caused by the respondent's director or that she had done everything required of her. The tribunal said she had until 12 March 2025 to start ACAS Early Conciliation, regardless of what the respondent, any liquidator or the managing director was doing. The claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Claim dismissed because it was presented outside the applicable time limit; the tribunal held it was reasonably practicable to start ACAS Early Conciliation in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim dismissed as out of time; the tribunal rejected the claimant's explanation that she had to wait for the respondent to be wound up. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Arrears of pay claim dismissed as out of time; the tribunal found the claimant could have started ACAS Early Conciliation by 12 March 2025. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.