Case 2408822/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr J Platts v Baker & Baker Products UK Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2408822/2020
- Decision date
- 10 August 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Buzzard
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr J Platts
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Buzzard sitting alone on 26 July 2021 to decide whether the claimant’s unfair dismissal and wrongful dismissal claims had been presented in time. The claimant’s employment ended on 11 February 2020. The judgment records that there was no factual dispute relevant to the limitation issue.
The parties agreed that the claimant first obtained an early conciliation certificate, referred to in the reasons as Certificate 1, but that it named a different prospective respondent, "CSM United Kingdom Wirral & Manchester", rather than "CSM (United Kingdom) Ltd". Certificate 1 recorded conciliation from 19 March 2020 to 8 April 2020. The claimant then started further early conciliation on 7 May 2020 and obtained Certificate 2, which named "CSM (United Kingdom) Ltd" and recorded conciliation from 7 May 2020 to 7 June 2021. The claim form was presented on 5 July 2020 naming "CSM (United Kingdom) Ltd" as respondent.
The respondent argued that there could not be a valid second early conciliation certificate and that limitation should be calculated by reference to Certificate 1, which would have made the claim out of time. The tribunal considered rule 12 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, including rule 12(1)(f) and rule 12(2A). It held that the naming difference between Certificate 1 and the claim form was minor, but that this did not alter the certificate itself and did not mean Certificate 2 was a second certificate against the same prospective respondent.
The tribunal concluded that, when the claim was presented, Certificate 2 was the first and only early conciliation certificate that identified the respondent named on the claim form. It therefore held that the claimant could rely on Certificate 2 and that the relevant limitation period should be calculated by reference to its dates. On that basis, the tribunal found that the claimant’s claim had been presented in time. The judgment does not decide the merits of either dismissal claim and records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal held the claim was presented in time because Certificate 2, naming the respondent correctly as CSM (United Kingdom) Ltd, was the first and only EC certificate identifying the respondent as the prospective respondent. The merits of the unfair dismissal claim were not decided. | Other | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal held the claim was presented in time for the same reasons as the unfair dismissal claim. The merits of the wrongful dismissal claim were not decided. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- rule 12(1)(f) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 12(2A) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
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.