Case 2600158/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H Luwaga v Loscoe Chilled Foods Limited (in Administration) — 2022
- Case reference
- 2600158/2022
- Decision date
- 7 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fredericks Appearances
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr H Luwaga
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard Mr H Luwaga's claims against Loscoe Chilled Foods Ltd at Nottingham on 7 June 2022. The claimant appeared in person by telephone and the respondent was represented by Miss T Burton. The tribunal recorded that reasons were given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim and the redundancy payment claim because it had no jurisdiction to hear them, the claims being out of time. It also dismissed the claim for unpaid accrued but untaken holiday pay on the same basis, again stating that the tribunal had no jurisdiction because the claim was out of time.
The claimant's personal injury complaint was also dismissed because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it in respect of the types of claims advanced by the claimant. The judgment states that none of the claimant's claims survived the decision.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it, as the claim was out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Dismissed because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it, as the claim was out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for unpaid accrued but untaken holiday pay dismissed because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it, as it was out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Claim in respect of personal injury dismissed because the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it in respect of the types of claims advanced. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.