Case 8000676/2023 · Employment Tribunal
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8000676/2023 (V) Held at Aberdeen on May 2024 Employment Judge N M Hosie Mr J Charlton v Ben Loyal Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000676/2023
- Decision date
- 7 May 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Venue
- Aberdeen
Parties
2 namedClaimant
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (SCOTLAND) Case No: 8000676/2023 (V) Held at Aberdeen on May 2024 Employment Judge N M Hosie Mr J Charlton
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 1 May 2024, Employment Judge N M Hosie determined a preliminary time-limit issue in Mr J Charlton's case against Ben Loyal Ltd. The tribunal found that it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to be presented before the end of the three-month period beginning with the effective date of termination, and that it was presented within a reasonable further period.
On that basis, the tribunal held that it had jurisdiction to consider the claim. The judgment records only that issue and does not contain a substantive liability decision or any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Preliminary limitation/jurisdiction decision only. The tribunal held that it was not reasonably practicable for the claim to be presented before the end of the three-month period beginning with the effective date of termination, and that it was presented within a reasonable further period. The judgment does not record a substantive merits finding. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- not reasonably practicable
- reasonable further period
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.