Case 3307351/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Bowles v Mr J Cahill — 2021
- Case reference
- 3307351/2020
- Decision date
- 27 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Tynan
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Bowles
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr A Bowles brought claims against Mr J Cahill for unfair dismissal and notice pay. The tribunal dealt with the matter on the papers at Reading before Employment Judge Tynan on 25 March 2021. It struck out the claim in full, holding that both complaints had no reasonable prospects of success because the claim had been presented out of time.
The tribunal found that it was reasonably practicable for the Claimant to have presented his claim within the time limits prescribed by the Employment Rights Act 1996. No substantive liability findings were made on the dismissal or the notice pay complaint, and no monetary remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the claim was presented out of time and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the Claimant to have presented it within the statutory time limit. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The notice pay complaint was struck out on the same out-of-time basis; the tribunal found it had no reasonable prospects of success. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- Employment Rights Act 1996 time limits
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.