Case 6007758/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Lorna Allen v Abele Care Ltd RECONSIDERATION — 2025
- Case reference
- 6007758/2025
- Decision date
- 29 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Lorna Allen
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal considered the respondent's application to reconsider Employment Judge Perry's decision rejecting the respondent's ET3 response. The application was made in time and was supported by a bundle and a witness statement from a litigation executive at Peninsula.
The Tribunal found that the ET3 had not been submitted by the original deadline, the requested extended date, or until 20 August 2025. It accepted that the respondent's representative appeared to have made a mistake when using the HMCTS portal, but noted that no confirmation of submission or acknowledgement had been received and that the portal could have been checked.
The Tribunal refused the reconsideration application, taking into account the more than three month delay, the lack of a sufficient explanation for earlier failures to provide instructions and documents, and the respondent's representative's failure to take available steps to confirm submission.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | The judgment identifies the underlying case as a claim of detriment on account of making protected disclosures, but this reconsideration judgment did not determine the merits of that claim. | Other | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment identifies the underlying case as including automatic unfair dismissal on account of making protected disclosures, but this reconsideration judgment did not determine the merits of that claim. | Other | — | — |
| Other | The respondent's application for reconsideration of the decision rejecting its ET3 response was refused. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- Rule 68 Employment Tribunal Rules
- Rule 70 Employment Tribunal Rules
- Rule 17(1) Employment Tribunal Rules 2024
- Rule 21 Employment Tribunal Rules
- Kwik Save Ltd v Swain and Others (1997) ICR 49
- Pestle & Mortar v Turner [2005]
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.