In person For the v Mrs Singh (solicitor, Peninsula) — 2023

Jodie Brownbill was employed by Enlightenment Care Services as a care worker from 10 October 2019. Her ET1 was accepted on 9 May 2022 and sent to the respondent on 1 June 2022, with a response due by 29 June 2022. The respondent did not file an ET3 on time, and on 4 April 2023 its representatives applied out of time. Applying Rule 20 and the approach in Kwik Save Stores Ltd v Swain and ors 1997 ICR 49, the judge found the explanation for the delay was not satisfactory, the prejudice balance favoured the claimant, and the draft defence had limited merit, so the extension request was refused.

Because no response had been accepted, the tribunal entered judgment under Rule 21 that the claimant's unfair dismissal claim was well-founded. The judgment records that the dismissal was said to be automatically unfair because of detriment caused by making a protected disclosure. The tribunal did not enter judgment on the unpaid holiday pay element because the schedule of loss did not explain what was being claimed for that head, and that issue was left for separate case management if pursued.

At remedy, the claimant said she had not worked for the respondent since April 2022, had done some ad hoc agency work earning £251.20, and was receiving universal credit. She became a part-time student in February 2023. The judge awarded a basic award of £483.86, calculated from two qualifying years of service and a gross monthly pay figure of £2,096.74, and a compensatory award of £15,238.50 for loss of earnings from April 2022 to January 2023 after deducting agency earnings. Future loss of earnings was not awarded. The total award was £15,722.36, and the recoupment provisions applied to the compensatory award for the prescribed period 22 April 2022 to 28 April 2023.