Case 4109290/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Tinnion Mr. Peter Ryan v British Telecommunications plc — 2021
- Case reference
- 4109290/2021
- Decision date
- 29 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr. A.
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Tinnion Mr. Peter Ryan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant confirmed that he brought only one claim about an alleged shortfall in enhanced redundancy pay following dismissal on grounds of redundancy. He put that claim as unlawful deduction from wages under s.13(1) ERA 1996 and as breach of contract under the Industrial Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (Scotland) Order 1994. He confirmed he was not bringing complaints of unfair dismissal, statutory redundancy payment, PILON, CLARPS, or any other matter.
The Tribunal found that the unlawful deduction complaint had to be presented by 28 February 2021, three months from the 30 November 2020 payment, and the breach of contract complaint had to be presented by 8 February 2021, three months from termination on 8 November 2020. The Claimant contacted ACAS on 29 March 2021 and presented the ET1 on 27 April 2021, so both complaints were out of time.
The Tribunal accepted the Claimant's evidence about bereavements, physical impairment, and poor mental condition, but was not satisfied that he had proved it was not reasonably practicable to present the complaints in time. It also found that, even if presentation in time had not been reasonably practicable, the Claimant had not acted with reasonable promptness after becoming aware in mid-March 2021 that he might be able to bring a claim. The Tribunal therefore concluded that it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the claim.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim under s.13(1) ERA 1996 for alleged failure to pay full enhanced redundancy pay entitlement was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | Contract claim under the Industrial Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (Scotland) Order 1994 for alleged failure to pay full enhanced redundancy pay entitlement was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- s.13(1) ERA 1996
- s.23(2)(a) ERA 1996
- s.23(4) ERA 1996
- Para. 7 Industrial Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (Scotland) Order 1994
- reasonable practicability
- Palmer v Southend-on-Sea BC
- Porter v Bandridge Ltd
- Kauser v Asda Stores Ltd
- Schultz v Esso Petroleum Ltd
- Marley (UK) Ltd v Anderson
- Howlett Marine Services Ltd v Bowlam
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.