Case 3300608/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Christine Brown v The British Red Cross Society — 2024
- Case reference
- 3300608/2024
- Decision date
- 20 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hallen Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Christine Brown
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs Christine Brown was employed by The British Red Cross Society as a shop manager from 28 August 2014 until her dismissal for redundancy on 14 June 2023. The tribunal found that the effective date of dismissal was 14 June 2023 and that the primary time limit for the claims expired on 13 September 2023. The claimant completed ACAS early conciliation only on 16 January 2024 and filed the claim form the same day, after an earlier claim form had been rejected because ACAS early conciliation had not first been completed.
The issue before Employment Judge Hallen was jurisdiction: whether it was not reasonably practicable for the claims to be presented in time under section 23 ERA 1996 and regulation 30(2) of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and if so whether the claims were then brought within a reasonable time. The claimant did not attend the remote hearing. The judge was satisfied that the case could proceed in her absence under rule 47, and treated her written explanation as the basis for the time-limit issue. A postponement application had been refused by Regional Employment Judge Foxwell before the hearing, and the claimant then confirmed she was not asking for a postponement.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant said she did not fully understand the claim process, but held that ignorance of the procedure was not enough to make it not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. The judgment said she should have taken advice or made reasonable enquiries after dismissal, and that no other impediment to timely presentation was identified. It therefore found that the claims could and should have been brought by 13 September 2023. The tribunal also said that, even if the second-stage question had to be considered, the claimant had not shown that the claim form filed on 16 January 2024 was presented within a reasonable time after expiry of the primary limit. The claim form was accordingly struck out and the tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holiday pay | Claim for unpaid holiday pay was presented after the primary time limit. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and, in any event, that it was not presented within a reasonable time after expiry of the limit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Claim for breach of contract was presented after the primary time limit. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and, in any event, that it was not presented within a reasonable time after expiry of the limit. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- section 23 ERA 1996
- regulation 30(2) Working Time Regulations 1998
- reasonably practicable test
- two-stage time limit test
- rule 47 Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013
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.