Case 2402858/2024 · Employment Tribunal
J Lynch Respondent Govdata Limited PRELIMINARY HEARING HELD AT: Manchester v C Hugo, CEO — 2024
- Case reference
- 2402858/2024
- Decision date
- 10 December 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Batten
Parties
2 namedClaimant
J Lynch Respondent Govdata Limited PRELIMINARY HEARING HELD AT: Manchester
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on 4 December 2024 in Manchester, Employment Judge Batten sitting alone held that the claimant's complaints of unfair dismissal, breach of contract, holiday pay and unauthorised deductions from wages were not presented in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions. The tribunal found that each complaint had to be brought within three months.
The tribunal was satisfied that it was reasonably practicable to present the claims before the end of that three-month period. On that basis, all four complaints were dismissed on limitation grounds. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's notice.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because it was not presented within the relevant statutory time limit; the tribunal was satisfied it was reasonably practicable to present the claim before the end of the three-month period. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed because it was not presented within the relevant statutory time limit; the tribunal was satisfied it was reasonably practicable to present the claim before the end of the three-month period. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed because it was not presented within the relevant statutory time limit; the tribunal was satisfied it was reasonably practicable to present the claim before the end of the three-month period. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed because it was not presented within the relevant statutory time limit; the tribunal was satisfied it was reasonably practicable to present the claim before the end of the three-month period. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- reasonably practicable
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.