Case 2500120/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs L Ayre v DMA Law Limited Heard: Remotely (by video) — 2020
- Case reference
- 2500120/2021
- Decision date
- 2 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Shore Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs L Ayre
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing held remotely by video on 8 July 2021, Employment Judge S Shore considered the claimant's unfair dismissal claim against DMA Law Limited. The Tribunal found that the effective date of termination was 24 August 2020.
The Tribunal held that Mrs L Ayre did not present her unfair dismissal claim before the end of the three-month period beginning with that effective date of termination, including any pause for early conciliation, as required by section 111(2)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It further found that it was reasonably practicable for her to have done so, so the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claim under sections 94 and 98 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and the claim was struck out.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal held that the claim was not presented within the three-month period beginning with the effective date of termination, taking account of any pause for early conciliation, and that it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented it in time. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 111(2)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996
- sections 94 and 98 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.