Case 2415315/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs B Blackman v Sodexo Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2415315/2020
- Decision date
- 9 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Slater REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs B Blackman
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought a complaint of unfair dismissal. The preliminary issue was whether the tribunal had jurisdiction, given the statutory time limit. Her employment ended on 13 May 2020, the primary time limit expired on 12 August 2020, ACAS was notified on 17 September 2020, and the claim was presented on 25 September 2020. Because ACAS was not notified within the primary time limit, no early conciliation extension applied.
The claimant said she had delayed because ACAS advised her that she needed documents, in particular the appeal outcome letter, before bringing a tribunal claim. The tribunal found the evidence about that alleged advice inconsistent and found that ACAS did not give that advice. It found instead that the claimant did not seek ACAS advice until after the time limit had expired and had been told the claim would be out of time.
The tribunal noted that the claimant accepted she knew on 13 May 2020 that she could bring an unfair dismissal claim and that there was a three-month time limit. Having rejected the explanation for the late presentation, the tribunal was not satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. It therefore held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the complaint and dismissed the claim.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction because the unfair dismissal complaint was presented out of time and the claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Section 111(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- 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.