Case 3307942/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person (assisted by interpreter) For the v Mr A and Mr C Deforti, Directors — 2021
- Case reference
- 3307942/2020
- Decision date
- 26 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Lewis Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person (assisted by interpreter) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal first recorded that an oral judgment given on 3 March 2021, which had upheld the claim in part, was revoked when the judge revisited the limitation point while preparing written reasons. The final decision was that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claim because it had been presented out of time.
The judge calculated that ACAS early conciliation began on 26 February 2020 and ended on 26 March 2020, making about 19 June 2020 the last day for presenting the claim. The ET1 was presented on 14 August 2020, which the judge calculated was 55 days late. The claimant could not explain the delay, and the judge rejected reliance on language difficulty and lockdown, finding that he had been signposted to the tribunal process shortly after termination and had time to make further inquiries.
Applying the test of whether it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time, and whether it was brought within a further reasonable period, the judge held that the extension test was not met. The written judgment therefore dismissed the claim, and the reasons state that it was struck out for want of jurisdiction. The judge also said that the March hearing summary was included for fairness only and did not amount to findings once jurisdiction had been rejected.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The oral judgment given on 3 March 2021 was revoked. On reconsideration of limitation, the tribunal held the claim was 55 days out of time and that it was not shown to be not reasonably practicable to present it in time; the written reasons say the claim was dismissed and, in the reasons, struck out for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- not reasonably practicable
- further reasonable period
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.