Mr G Jones v TecFlo Limited — 2021

The claim form dated 3 December 2020 began proceedings for automatically unfair dismissal for having made a protected disclosure, ordinary unfair dismissal, and breach of contract. This judgment did not decide those substantive claims. It reconsidered the earlier decision to reject the respondent's Response under Rule 19 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013.

The tribunal found that an application for extension of time had been made by email on 10 February 2021, after the response deadline of 1 February 2021, but that the application was defective because it did not comply with Rules 18 and 20. The respondent's newly instructed solicitors submitted a draft Response on 13 April 2021. Applying Rule 6 on irregularities and non-compliance, the judge held it would be unjust to reject the Response where the litigant in person respondent had applied within 10 days of the deadline and a draft Response was filed within 14 days of the solicitors being instructed, and noted that the claimant had already seen the extension request and draft Response.

The earlier decision to reject the Response was revoked. The tribunal proposed to extend time for the Response, gave the claimant 14 days to object and ask to be heard, and listed an open preliminary hearing for case management if needed. No remedy or substantive liability findings were made in this judgment.