Mr M Sherwood v Baldwins Crane Hire Ltd Heard: at Leeds by CVP — 2026

The claim was identified as unfair dismissal. This judgment concerned the respondent's application for an extension of time to present a response and whether the earlier Rule 22 Judgment should be set aside, not the substantive merits of the unfair dismissal claim.

The Tribunal considered evidence from Mr D McDonald, a senior executive of the respondent. It found that Mr McDonald had been given the task of responding to the claim, had not read the Tribunal's instructions, and had got the response process wrong. The Tribunal also found there had been a Tribunal mix-up because the notice of rejection had been sent to the respondent's incorrect email address, and that between 2 December 2025 and 28 April 2026 the respondent had not been proactive in enquiring what had happened to the response.

Applying Rule 21 of the Employment Tribunal Procedure Rules 2024 and the approach in Kwik Save Stores Limited v Swain and Others, the Tribunal considered the explanation for delay, the merits of the defence, and the balance of prejudice. It noted substantial conflict between the parties' positions, including about the dismissal date, and recorded that the claimant claimed £75,000 in his claim form, while no Schedule of Loss had been seen.

The Tribunal concluded that the use of the wrong email address for the notice of rejection weighed heavily in the respondent's favour and that preventing the respondent from defending the claim would cause substantial prejudice. Time was extended by 154 days for filing the response, and the Judgment dated 27 April 2026 was set aside. No remedy was awarded in this judgment.