Case 2409299/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Last v Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy — 2023
- Case reference
- 2409299/2022
- Decision date
- 14 February 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Last
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found that the claimant's claims for unlawful deduction from wages, holiday pay and notice pay had been submitted out of time. It nevertheless determined that it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to submit the claim before the time limit expired, and that he submitted it within a reasonable period thereafter.
The claimant acknowledged that he was not an employee and was therefore not eligible for a compensation payment from the respondent out of the National Insurance Fund. He withdrew the claims for unpaid wages, holiday pay and notice pay, and the claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The claimant withdrew the unpaid wages claim after acknowledging that he was not an employee and was not eligible for a compensation payment from the respondent out of the National Insurance Fund; the claim was thereby dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claimant withdrew the holiday pay claim after acknowledging that he was not an employee and was not eligible for a compensation payment from the respondent out of the National Insurance Fund; the claim was thereby dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The notice pay claim was withdrawn and thereby dismissed. Notice pay is classified as breach of contract in the absence of a more specific finding in the judgment. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- not reasonably practicable
- within a reasonable period of time thereafter
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.