Mr G Rudley v Community Homes of Intensive Care and Education Ltd PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2025

This was a preliminary hearing on the respondent's late response. Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto found that the response had been presented almost eight months out of time and that the breach was significant and serious. The judge said there was no excusable explanation for the delay, noting that the response had been received by 10 May 2025, that it was due by 5 June 2025, and that there had been ample time either to file it on time or to seek an extension.

The tribunal accepted that the claim form had been properly served on the respondent and that it had been passed internally to Martin Prescott, described as a director of quality. The judge observed that the respondent had an HR department and administrative support, but no one dealt with the claim in time. The fact that the respondent later revised its systems was said to be commendable but not a basis for allowing the late response in this case.

Having considered prejudice and the circumstances as a whole, the tribunal rejected the respondent's application to file a response out of time. The judgment states that the response was rejected, but that the respondent was given permission to participate in the remedy hearing, including by giving evidence. No substantive liability decision on the underlying breach of contract, disability discrimination, TUPE or unfair dismissal claims was made in this judgment.