Case 2403538/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Z Seddon v Asda Stores Limited — 2022

Case reference: 2403538/2022
Decision date: 1 November 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Z Seddon

Respondent

Asda Stores Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The claimant brought a claim described as unfair constructive dismissal under sections 95 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Tribunal found that the claim had been presented outside the primary time limit.

The Tribunal also found that it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented within time, and that the claimant presented it within such further time as was reasonable under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. On that basis, the Tribunal held that it had jurisdiction to hear the claim.

The judgment records only this jurisdictional decision. It does not determine the merits of the unfair constructive dismissal claim and makes no remedy award.

Claims and outcomes

1 finding recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The judgment determined only that the unfair constructive dismissal claim was in time for jurisdictional purposes because it was not reasonably practicable to present it within the primary time limit and it was presented within a reasonable further period. The substantive unfair dismissal claim was not decided in this judgment.	Other	—	—

Legal tests applied

5 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.