Case 2407931/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K Delaney v Lookers Motor Group Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 2407931/2023
- Decision date
- 3 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K Delaney
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in public at Manchester on 17 May 2024, Employment Judge Cookson considered Mr K Delaney's unfair dismissal claim against Lookers Motor Group Limited. The tribunal recorded that the claimant was represented in person and the respondent by counsel.
The tribunal decided that the unfair dismissal claim was not made within the time limit in section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It found that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have brought the claim within three months of the effective date of termination, and on that basis held that the Employment Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the claim. No remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary jurisdiction decision. The tribunal held the unfair dismissal claim was not presented within the time limit in section 111 Employment Rights Act 1996, and that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have brought it within three months of the effective date of termination. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.111 ERA 1996
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.