Case 3303300/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs S Alleyne v Miajac Limited (trading as Zappas) — 2019
- Case reference
- 3303300/2019
- Decision date
- 30 September 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs S Alleyne
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMrs S Alleyne presented her claim on 24 January 2019, complaining of unfair dismissal, notice pay and holiday pay. The tribunal recorded that her employment began on 1 September 1989 and ended on 27 July 2018. It found that the primary limitation period expired on 26 October 2018, that she contacted ACAS on 25 October 2018, and that the early conciliation certificate issued on 25 November 2018 extended time only to 25 December 2018. The judge noted that the claims therefore appeared to have been presented out of time.
The hearing on 30 September 2019 was listed as a preliminary hearing to decide jurisdiction. The claimant did not attend and was not represented. Tribunal staff had attempted to contact her on 27 September 2019, and a friend then said that the claimant was due to go into hospital on 28 September 2019 for a planned C-section and would send evidence, but no clear postponement application was made and no supporting evidence was later provided.
Applying rule 47 of the Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013, the judge considered the claimant's absence and noted the earlier warning that the claims appeared to be out of time. The tribunal also referred to rule 37(1)(b) and rule 37(1)(d), and refused any implied postponement because there was no medical evidence, no prior application for postponement, and no indication of when the claimant would be available for any relisted hearing. The claim was dismissed. The judgment also records the respondent's name as Miajic Limited (trading as Zappas).
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim form pleaded unfair dismissal. The tribunal dismissed the claim at a preliminary hearing on jurisdiction and time-limit grounds, without reaching the merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The claim form also complained of notice pay. The tribunal dismissed the claim with the rest of the proceedings because the complaints appeared to be out of time and the claimant did not attend the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | The claim form also complained of holiday pay. The tribunal dismissed the claim with the rest of the proceedings because the complaints appeared to be out of time and the claimant did not attend the hearing. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- rule 47 Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 37(1)(b) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals 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.