Mr Mircea Topirceanu v Tanber Solutions Ltd — 2021

The tribunal treated the preliminary hearing as a final hearing under Rule 48 because it was satisfied that neither party would be materially prejudiced. The respondent had not filed an ET3 in time, and the tribunal considered it appropriate to enter judgment under Rule 21 on the basis of the claimant's ET1 and oral evidence.

The tribunal held that the redundancy payment claim had been presented outside the six-month time limit in section 164(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, but accepted it under section 164(2) as just and equitable. It also held that the breach of contract, unlawful deduction from wages and holiday pay claims were out of time, but extended time because it was not reasonably practicable for them to have been presented earlier.

On the merits, the tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment. It also found that the respondent failed to provide the statutory minimum notice required by section 86 ERA 1996, made an unauthorised deduction of two weeks' wages, and failed to pay the claimant's holiday entitlement.