Case 3203133/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v H & V 2000 Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3203133/2022
- Decision date
- 31 October 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Brewer heard a preliminary hearing limited to time limits. The claimant appeared in person and the respondent was represented by a solicitor. The claimant had ticked unfair dismissal, disability discrimination, notice pay and another type of claim described as wrongful dismissal, but after discussion the tribunal treated the case as three claims: unfair dismissal, breach of contract/notice pay, and disability discrimination. The dismissal date was 9 December 2021. The claimant started early conciliation on 30 March 2022, received his certificate on 19 April 2022, and presented the claim on 6 May 2022. The tribunal recorded that the normal time limit expired on 8 March 2022.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction: the claim was presented out of time, time was not extended, and it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | This covered the notice pay / breach of contract complaint. It was struck out for the same time-limit and jurisdiction reasons as the unfair dismissal claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Struck out on time-limit grounds. The tribunal also noted that the claimant did not say in evidence that he was dismissed because of disability, and treated the pleaded discrimination case as unclear/wholly unpleaded. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
15 references- s.111(2)(b) ERA 1996 not reasonably practicable test
- further reasonable period after expiry
- s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 just and equitable test
- Dedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances Ltd
- Porter v Bandridge Ltd
- Palmer v Southend-on-Sea Borough Council
- Asda Stores Ltd v Kauser
- Trevelyans (Birmingham) Ltd v Norton
- University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust v Williams
- Nolan v Balfour Beatty Engineering Services
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre t/a Leisure Link
- British Coal Corporation v Keeble
- Department of Constitutional Affairs v Jones
- London Borough of Southwark v Afolabi
- Apelogun-Gabriels v London Borough of Lambeth
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.