Louise Kelly v Represented by: Mr C Brown - Representative Hudson Digital Ltd — 2019

The claimant, Louise Kelly, brought a breach of contract complaint saying she had not been paid on termination for her full contractual notice period. The respondent said she had accepted payment of four weeks' notice and, if not, had been required to work for eight weeks or be placed on garden leave. The tribunal heard only a preliminary time-bar issue at this stage.

The tribunal found that the claimant's employment ended on 28 January 2019, that she contacted Acas for early conciliation on 16 April 2019, received an early conciliation certificate on 18 April 2019, and presented an ET1 on 25 April 2019. That first ET1 was rejected because the respondent was named incorrectly as Mr P Bryce rather than Hudson Digital Ltd, the name shown on the early conciliation certificate. The rejection email was sent to an incorrect email address, so the claimant did not receive it.

The claimant contacted the tribunal on 21 May 2019, learned that the first ET1 had been rejected, and submitted a second ET1 on 23 May 2019 naming Hudson Digital Ltd. Although that second claim was, on its face, outside the extended time limit created by early conciliation, the tribunal held that it was not reasonably practicable for the claimant to present the claim in time because she had not received the rejection notice. It also found that she acted within a reasonable time once she learned of the rejection.

The tribunal therefore held that it had jurisdiction to hear the breach of contract complaint and that the claim should proceed. It did not determine the merits of the claimant's complaint or the respondent's counterclaim, and noted that the case would be relisted for a full hearing once the position on the respondent's insolvency and any required consent was clarified.