Case 3200981/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Haddy Jammeh v CH&CO Group — 2022
- Case reference
- 3200981/2022
- Decision date
- 6 June 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sugarman Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Haddy Jammeh
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal held that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was presented outside the three-month time limit in s111(2)(a) Employment Rights Act 1996. It found the claimant had failed to establish that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and also failed to show that it was brought within such further period as was reasonable under s111(2)(b). The tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the unfair dismissal claim and dismissed it.
The claimant's 'assault' claim was treated by the tribunal as an intended claim under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. That claim was withdrawn, and the tribunal noted that it would not in any event have had jurisdiction to hear it. The claimant said she might wish to pursue the matter in the civil courts.
The claimant also applied on 2 June 2022 to amend the claim form to add claims of wrongful dismissal and unlawful deduction of wages in respect of accrued holiday pay. The tribunal refused that application. No substantive findings were made on those proposed claims.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim was presented outside the three-month time limit in s111(2)(a) ERA 1996. The tribunal found the claimant had not established that it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time, or that it was presented within such further period as was reasonable under s111(2)(b). | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The claimant's 'assault' claim, understood by the tribunal to be a claim under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, was withdrawn. The tribunal also stated it did not in any event have jurisdiction to hear such a claim. | Withdrawn | — | — |
| Wrongful dismissal | On 2 June 2022 the claimant applied to amend the claim form to add wrongful dismissal, but the tribunal refused the amendment. No substantive determination of the claim was made. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | On 2 June 2022 the claimant applied to amend the claim form to add unlawful deduction of wages in respect of accrued holiday pay, but the tribunal refused the amendment. No substantive determination of the claim was made. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s111(2)(a) ERA 1996
- s111(2)(b) ERA 1996
- reasonably practicable test
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.