Case 3332922/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs Lorraine (Counsel) For the v Mr Cuckney (Solicitor) — 2020
- Case reference
- 3332922/2018
- Decision date
- 6 January 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Alliott
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs Lorraine (Counsel) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt Watford on 6 January 2020, Employment Judge Alliott, sitting alone, heard the case of Mr W Roques against Buckinghamshire County Council. The tribunal recorded that the claim had not been brought in time.
The tribunal was not satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to have been presented before the end of the three-month period beginning with the effective date of termination. On that basis, it held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the case.
The judgment therefore struck out the case. No findings were made on the underlying merits of any whistleblowing or unfair dismissal complaint, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The tribunal found the claim was not brought in time and was struck out for lack of jurisdiction; no merits findings were made. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claim was not brought in time and was struck out for lack of jurisdiction; no merits findings were made. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- not reasonably practicable
- three-month period beginning with the EDT
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.