Mr K Giusti v Avant Homes Limited Heard: Remotely (by telephone) — 2021

At the remote preliminary hearing on 1 July 2021, Employment Judge S Shore struck out the claimant's unfair dismissal claim and his wages claim. The tribunal recorded that the claimant's employment ended on 30 September 2020, that ACAS early conciliation began on 26 December 2020, and that the ET1 was presented on 26 February 2021.

On unfair dismissal, the tribunal found that the claimant did not have two years' continuous service, so the Tribunal had no jurisdiction under s.108 ERA 1996. It also found that the claim was out of time under s.111 ERA 1996. The claimant said he had posted an earlier ET1 in the last week of January 2021, but the tribunal found that account vague and unpersuasive, and held that he had not shown it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. It referred to the authorities on late presentation, including Consignia plc v Sealy, Capital Foods Retail Ltd v Corrigan, Camden and Islington Community Services NHS Trust v Kennedy, Clark v H20 Water Services Ltd, and Initial Electronic Security Systems Ltd v Avdic.

The unauthorised deduction from wages claim had two parts. The first was an alleged entitlement to a £950 annual pay rise from April 2020; the tribunal held that the claimant had not identified any quantified or quantifiable legal entitlement to that increase, so that head of claim was misconceived. The second was commission on sales, but the tribunal found that the last quantifiable commission fell in July 2020, so the time limit to start ACAS early conciliation expired on 31 October 2020 and the claim was presented too late. The tribunal concluded that it was reasonably practicable for all claims to have been presented in time, and no remedy was awarded.