Case 3305953/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr S Clegg v Meadway Private Hire Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3305953/2022
- Decision date
- 21 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Street Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr S Clegg
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary judgment in which Employment Judge Street extended time for the claimant's claims of unfair dismissal, breach of contract, unlawful deduction from wages and accrued but unpaid holiday pay. The tribunal recorded that it was not reasonably practicable for Mr Clegg to bring those claims in time.
The judgment did not determine the substantive merits of those claims and did not make any monetary award. It also stated that entitlement to a redundancy payment was to be considered at the final hearing, so no conclusion on redundancy pay was reached in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Time for presenting the claim was extended; the merits were not decided in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Time for presenting the claim was extended; the merits were not decided in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Time for presenting the claim was extended; the merits were not decided in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Time for presenting the claim was extended in respect of accrued but unpaid holiday pay; the merits were not decided in this judgment. | Other | — | — |
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.