Case 3213070/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Linda Jackson v Sabir 2015 Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 3213070/2020
- Decision date
- 17 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Barrett Representation
- Venue
- East London
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Linda Jackson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Linda Jackson’s claims were heard remotely by Cloud Video Platform on 16 March 2021 before Employment Judge Barrett. The respondent did not attend and was not represented. The Tribunal recorded that the hearing was remote because the matters could be determined in that way.
The Tribunal held that the Claimant’s claims for unfair dismissal, notice pay and holiday pay were issued outside the statutory time period for making such complaints. On that basis, it found that it had no jurisdiction to consider the claims on their merits.
All three claims were therefore dismissed. The judgment does not record any findings on the substantive merits of dismissal, notice pay or holiday pay, and it contains no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Claim dismissed because it was issued outside the statutory time period; the Tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to consider the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Judgment refers to this as a claim for 'notice pay'; it was dismissed as out of time, with no jurisdiction to consider the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed because it was issued outside the statutory time period; the Tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to consider the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.