Case 2409116/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr N Fairburn v Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy and 1 other — 2021
- Case reference
- 2409116/2020
- Decision date
- 10 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Aspinall Representation
- Venue
- Liverpool in person
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr N Fairburn
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal determined that the effective date of termination of the claimant's employment for the purposes of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was 31 December 2018.
The claimant's complaints for a redundancy payment and holiday pay were brought out of time, and the tribunal found that it had no jurisdiction to hear those complaints because it was reasonably practicable for him to have brought a tribunal claim. The claimant's complaint against the Secretary of State's determination not to award a redundancy payment was brought in time, but was not well founded. All complaints were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The redundancy payment complaint was dismissed. The tribunal found the complaint was out of time where it was reasonably practicable to have brought a tribunal claim, and also found the in-time complaint against the Secretary of State's determination not to award a redundancy payment was not well founded. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The holiday pay complaint was dismissed because it was brought out of time in circumstances where the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to have brought a tribunal claim. | 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.