Case 2500111/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Mitchison v McDonald’s Restaurants Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2500111/2022
- Decision date
- 10 April 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Morris
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Mitchison
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr S Mitchison’s claims against McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd were heard by Employment Judge Morris sitting alone at Newcastle Hearing Centre by CVP on 8 April 2022. The judgment recorded that both complaints were outside the primary three-month time period, as extended by Early Conciliation where applicable, and that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented them within that time.
The first complaint was wrongful dismissal. The tribunal held that the complaint was not presented in time under article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994 and said it was precluded from considering the complaint further. The second complaint concerned an alleged failure to permit the claimant to be accompanied at a disciplinary hearing by his chosen companion. The tribunal held that this complaint was also out of time under section 11(2)(a) of the Employment Relations Act 1999 and likewise did not go on to consider the merits.
No remedy was awarded and the judgment contains no compensation or other monetary figure. The decision was given orally at the hearing, with written reasons to be provided only if requested within 14 days.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wrongful dismissal | The tribunal found this complaint was not presented within the primary three-month time limit (plus the Early Conciliation extension) under article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994. It held that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented the complaint in time and therefore did not consider the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | This was the complaint that the respondent failed to permit the claimant to be accompanied at a disciplinary hearing by his chosen companion. The tribunal found it was not presented within the primary time limit in section 11(2)(a) of the Employment Relations Act 1999, that it was reasonably practicable to present it in time, and that it was therefore precluded from considering the complaint. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- article 7 of the Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994
- section 11(2)(a) of the Employment Relations Act 1999
- reasonably practicable test
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.