Mr A Auld v Represented by: Ms L Beedle - Solicitor K W Contractors Ltd and 1 other — 2026

This was a preliminary hearing on time bar and whether the second respondent could properly be proceeded against. The tribunal held that Mr Auld's ET1, presented on 26 June 2025, was outside the relevant limit. It treated the ordinary limitation date as 21 April 2025 and, applying s.207B(3) and s.207B(4) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, found that the adjusted deadline was 15 June 2025, so the claim was 11 days late.

The tribunal rejected the claimant's argument that the conciliation period should be added on in the way suggested in correspondence. It held that the claimant was legally represented, that the time limits were clear, and that there was no basis for saying it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. On that basis, the unfair dismissal, unlawful deduction from wages and breach of contract complaints were dismissed.

The tribunal also considered whether the second respondent, Ms J Ironside, could be liable personally. Assuming Antuzis v D J Houghton applied in Scotland, it held that the pleaded case did not engage the exceptional principle in that authority. The tribunal said the allegations that the company was being 'run down' and that the claimant was dismissed for personal reasons were not enough to make the second respondent personally liable, so the case against her was dismissed.