Case 2409182/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Martin Salisbury v Mr Callum Barker t/a Barker’s Exterior Cleaning — 2021
- Case reference
- 2409182/2020
- Decision date
- 13 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Robinson
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Martin Salisbury
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claim was for unfair dismissal only. The hearing took place remotely by CVP at Liverpool on 13 January 2021 before Employment Judge Robinson sitting alone. The claimant was Mr Martin Salisbury and the respondent was Mr Callum Barker t/a Barker’s Exterior Cleaning.
The tribunal found that the unfair dismissal claim was presented out of time. It decided that it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time, so the statutory time limit was not extended on that basis.
The tribunal also found that, even if time could be extended, the claim was not presented within a reasonable further period after expiry of the time limit. On that basis, the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint and dismissed the unfair dismissal claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held the unfair dismissal claim was presented out of time. It found it was reasonably practicable to present the claim in time, and in any event it was not presented within a reasonable further period after the time limit expired. The tribunal therefore held it had no jurisdiction to hear the complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- reasonable further period of time
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.