Mr Laurentiu Voniea v Tanber Solutions Ltd — 2021

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

The preliminary hearing was treated as a final hearing under Rule 48. As the respondent had not presented an ET3 in time, the tribunal considered the claimant's ET1 and oral evidence and entered judgment under Rule 21.

On the substance, the tribunal found that the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a redundancy payment. It also found that he was dismissed in breach of contract because he was not given the statutory minimum notice, that there had been an unauthorised deduction of two weeks' wages, and that the respondent had failed to pay his holiday entitlement.