Case 3300556/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Xavier v New Look Retailers Ltd — 2022
- Case reference
- 3300556/2021
- Decision date
- 27 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Daniels
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Xavier
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Watford on 11 February 2022, Employment Judge Daniels, sitting alone, held that the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the claimant's pay arrears complaint because it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to be submitted in time in all the circumstances. The hearing was before the claimant in person and Ms Moyle, solicitor, for the respondent.
On the merits, the tribunal found that the claimant had not been subjected to an unlawful deduction from wages properly payable to her, and it also rejected the alternative breach of contract basis referred to in the judgment. The claim was therefore unsuccessful and was dismissed.
No monetary award was made, and the judgment records no separate remedy assessment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal accepted jurisdiction to hear the pay arrears complaint because it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to be submitted in time, but it found no unlawful deduction from wages. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal also rejected the alternative breach of contract basis referred to in the judgment and dismissed the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- not reasonably practicable
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.