Case 2408850/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs H Reid v Department for Work and Pensions — 2023
- Case reference
- 2408850/2022
- Decision date
- 10 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Phil Allen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs H Reid
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the claimant's claim for a protective award for failure to consult on the basis that it had no reasonable prospect of success.
The Tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim because it found that it did not have jurisdiction to determine it. The judgment states that the claim had not been entered at the Employment Tribunal within the time required under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996.
Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written judgment records that written reasons would only be provided if requested within the specified time.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim for a protective award for failure to consult was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. The locked taxonomy has no specific protective award category, so classified as other. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the Employment Tribunal found it did not have jurisdiction, the claim not having been entered within the time required under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.