Case 3202358/2023 · Employment Tribunal

Miss R M Veszeli v Travelodge Hotels Ltd — 2024

Case reference: 3202358/2023
Decision date: 21 June 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Suzanne Palmer
Venue: East London Hearing Centre

Indexed: 19 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss R M Veszeli

Respondent

Travelodge Hotels Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

The tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal complaint, brought pursuant to section 100 and/or section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The reason given was that the complaint had been presented outside the statutory time limit, and the tribunal found that it had been reasonably practicable to present it within time under section 111(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

The tribunal also dismissed the claimant's complaint that she had been subjected to a detriment in her employment on the ground that she made a protected disclosure under section 47B of the Employment Rights Act 1996. That complaint was also dismissed as out of time, with the tribunal finding that it had been reasonably practicable to present it within time under section 48(3) of the Employment Rights Act 1996.

Reasons were given orally at the hearing. The written judgment records that written reasons would not be provided unless requested by a party at the hearing or within 14 days of the written record being sent.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Complaint of unfair dismissal pursuant to section 100 and/or section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 was dismissed as presented outside the statutory time limit; the tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to present it within time.	Dismissed	—	—
Whistleblowing	Complaint of detriment on the ground of having made a protected disclosure pursuant to s47B Employment Rights Act 1996 was dismissed as presented outside the statutory time limit; the tribunal found it had been reasonably practicable to present it within time.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

5 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.