Case 3219950/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Tandon v Ofgem — 2021
- Case reference
- 3219950/2020
- Decision date
- 10 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Elgot Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant, Mr V Tandon, brought claims of unfair dismissal and unlawful deductions from wages against Ofgem. Employment Judge B Elgot heard the matter remotely by Cloud Video Platform on 9 June 2021. The tribunal held that both claims were struck out and dismissed because it had no jurisdiction to hear them.
The tribunal found that the claims had not been brought within the relevant time limits in section 111 and section 23(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It declined to extend time and was satisfied that there were no reasons why it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to present the claims within the relevant time limits. The judgment also records that there was no claim for a redundancy payment in the case.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal said the unfair dismissal claim was struck out and dismissed because it had no jurisdiction to hear it. It found the claim was out of time under section 111 ERA 1996 and that there was no basis to extend time because it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to be presented in time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal said the unlawful deductions from wages claim was struck out and dismissed because it had no jurisdiction to hear it. It found the claim was out of time under section 23(2) ERA 1996 and that there was no basis to extend time because it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to be presented in time. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 23(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- reasonably practicable
- extension of time
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.