Case 4113359/2018 · Employment Tribunal
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4113359/2018 Held in Glasgow on November 2018 Employment Judge: J D Young (Sitting Alone) Mr Stephen Friend v Clydeview Care Home Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 4113359/2018
- Decision date
- 26 November 2018
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge JD Young
- Venue
- Glasgow
Parties
2 namedClaimant
E.T. Z (WR) EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case Number: 4113359/2018 Held in Glasgow on November 2018 Employment Judge: J D Young (Sitting Alone) Mr Stephen Friend
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Stephen Friend worked for Clydeview Care Home Ltd from 7 July 2014 until 29 March 2018 as a staff nurse. He said the care home closed because there were no longer any residents, that he was verbally told he would not be needed, and that he did not receive written notice of termination. He also gave evidence that he sought advice from ACAS, the Citizens Advice Bureau and the Insolvency Service about the claims and time limits.
The tribunal held that the notice pay claim was effectively a breach of contract claim and was presented too late. The claimant’s last day of work was 29 March 2018, so the claim should have been presented by 28 June 2018, but it was not lodged until 16 August 2018. Applying the reasonable practicability question, the tribunal found it could not say it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time, noting that the claimant had received advice about time limits but had misunderstood the difference between the redundancy and notice pay claims.
The redundancy pay claim was found to be in time because it was brought within 6 months of termination. On the evidence accepted by the tribunal, the claimant was 53 at termination and had 3 complete years of employment. Using his weekly wage of £445.50, the tribunal calculated entitlement to 4.5 weeks' pay and awarded £2,004.75 as redundancy payment. The judgment noted that any payment request to the respondent was unlikely to succeed and that an application to the Insolvency Service under section 167 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 would likely be required.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The notice pay claim was treated as a breach of contract claim. The tribunal held it was presented out of time, as the last day worked was 29 March 2018 and the ET1 was not presented until 16 August 2018. The tribunal was not satisfied that it had not been reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the redundancy pay claim was in time and allowed it. It calculated entitlement at 4.5 weeks' pay using a weekly wage of £445.50, producing £2,004.75. | Upheld | — | £2,005 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,005
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- reasonable practicability test
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.