Case 3202663/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Dodssuweit v Crewlink Ireland Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 3202663/2019
- Decision date
- 10 August 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Russell Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Dodssuweit
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr S Dodssuweit, brought claims for unfair dismissal and breach of contract against Crewlink Ireland Limited. The tribunal heard the case on 10 August 2020 before Employment Judge Russell at East London Hearing Centre.
The tribunal found that the effective date of termination was 4 April 2020. It held that both the unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims were presented out of time.
The tribunal further found that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented his claims in time. On that basis, it held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claims and dismissed all claims.
The respondent's application for costs was refused. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the unfair dismissal claim was not presented within time and that it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented it in time. It therefore held it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal found the breach of contract claim was not presented within time and held that it had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- reasonably practicable
- not presented within time
- jurisdiction
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.