Case 2411411/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Ms L Carr - Solicitor — 2020
- Case reference
- 2411411/2019
- Decision date
- 27 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a public preliminary hearing in Manchester on 14 January 2020 before Employment Judge A M Buchanan. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Ms L Carr, solicitor. The Tribunal first dealt with the respondent's application to strike out for non-compliance with Rules 8-14 of the Employment Tribunals Rules 2013. That application was dismissed because the claimant had made only a minor error in naming the respondent, and the Tribunal held that it would not be in the interests of justice to strike out the claim on that basis; the respondent's name was amended to Matrix Telematics Limited without re-service.
The Tribunal then considered time limits for the unfair dismissal claim. It found that it had been reasonably practicable for the claim to have been filed by 16 August 2019, as extended by section 207B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The claim was filed on 11 September 2019, so the Tribunal held that it lacked jurisdiction under section 111(1) of the 1996 Act and struck out the unfair dismissal claim. The Tribunal also found, in any event, that the claim had not been presented within such further period as was reasonable under section 111(2)(b) of the 1996 Act.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal dismissed the respondent's Rule 37(1)(c) application to strike out for non-compliance with Rules 8-14, because the claimant had made only a minor error in naming the respondent and it would not be in the interests of justice to strike out the claim on that basis. The unfair dismissal claim itself was then struck out for being out of time. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 37(1)(c) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- s.111(2)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.207B Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.111(2)(b) 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.