Mr Paul Shepherd v Royal Mail Group Limited — 2023

The claimant did not attend and was not represented. The tribunal proceeded in his absence under Rule 47, noting that he resided in Georgia and did not have the required permission to give evidence to the tribunal from abroad. The tribunal considered the information available, including the respondent's submissions, a 150-page preliminary hearing bundle, and the claimant's email of 9 May 2023.

The tribunal found that the claimant's complaint under section 47B Employment Rights Act 1996, alleging detriment on the ground that he had made protected disclosures, was brought outside the relevant time limit in section 48(3). It was satisfied that it had been reasonably practicable for the claimant to bring the complaint in time and that he had failed to do so, so the claim was struck out for lack of jurisdiction.

The judgment records that the claimant said he had two remaining claims, described as unfair constructive dismissal and unauthorised deductions from wages. Those claims were not determined in this judgment; the claimant had been sent a letter requiring him by 18 May 2023 to show cause why they should not be struck out on the stated grounds concerning whether the respondent was his employer or liable to pay his wages.