Case 2413684/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Hughes v Plaza Blinds and Flooring Ltd — 2021
- Case reference
- 2413684/2020
- Decision date
- 9 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shotter
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Hughes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr C Hughes, brought claims for unfair dismissal, breach of contract and unlawful deduction of wages against Plaza Blinds and Flooring Ltd. The Tribunal noted that the claims were received on 4 September 2020 and that the effective date of termination was 22 October 2019.
The Tribunal held that the claims were not presented before the end of the 3-month period beginning with the effective date of termination. It was satisfied that it was reasonably practicable for a complaint to have been presented within that period, and that the complaints were not presented within any further period the Tribunal considered reasonable.
On that basis, the Tribunal concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to consider the complaints and dismissed them all. The hearing was before Employment Judge Shotter sitting alone on 8 September 2021.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Presented on 4 September 2020 after the effective date of termination on 22 October 2019; the Tribunal held the claim was out of time and that it was reasonably practicable to present it within the 3-month limit. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Presented on 4 September 2020 after the effective date of termination on 22 October 2019; the Tribunal held the claim was out of time and that it was reasonably practicable to present it within the 3-month limit. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Presented on 4 September 2020 after the effective date of termination on 22 October 2019; the Tribunal held the claim was out of time and that it was reasonably practicable to present it within the 3-month limit. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- 3-month time limit
- 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.