Case 3202147/2024 · Employment Tribunal
(1) Mr Keith Hunt (2) Mrs Lynn Hunt v Hunts Mastics Ltd (in Creditors Voluntary Liquidation) and 1 other — 2026
- Case reference
- 3202147/2024
- Decision date
- 13 March 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge S Shore Representation
Parties
3 namedClaimant
(1) Mr Keith Hunt (2) Mrs Lynn Hunt
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe two claimants brought three claims arising from their employment with the First Respondent (in creditors' voluntary liquidation): breach of contract for unpaid notice pay, statutory redundancy payment, and unauthorised deduction from wages relating to outstanding holiday pay. The First Respondent did not appear; the Second Respondent (Secretary of State for Business and Trade, statutory guarantor) was represented by a lay representative.
All three claims had been presented after the relevant statutory time limit. The Tribunal found that it had been reasonably practicable for the claimants to have presented the claims in time and dismissed all three on that basis. Reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing; written reasons were not provided.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Claim for failure to pay notice pay. Dismissed as presented out of time when it was reasonably practicable to have presented in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | Claim for statutory redundancy payment. Dismissed as presented out of time when it was reasonably practicable to have presented in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for unauthorised deduction from wages relating to outstanding holiday pay. Dismissed as presented out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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.