Late Claims for Redundancy and Notice Payments Rejected by Employment Tribunal
📌 In brief
An Employment Tribunal rejected a worker's claims for redundancy and notice payments because these claims were made too late, beyond the allowed timeframe set by law.
⚖️ Legal holding
A claimant must present complaints about redundancy and notice payments within the relevant time limit, otherwise it is not just and equitable to extend this period.
📖 Technical summary
The employment tribunal dismissed claims for redundancy and notice payments as out of time.
📜 Headnote Official document
The employment tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaints regarding redundancy payments and notice payments as they were presented outside the relevant time limit. The tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend this period.
📚 Full judgment Official document
OUTCOME: Dismissed
Case Number: 3310779/2024 & 3310780/2024
Page 1 of 2
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimants: [redacted]
Respondent: [redacted]
Reading On: 20 April 2026
Before:
Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto
Representation Claimant: [redacted]
Respondent: [redacted]
JUDGMENT
The employment tribunal cannot consider the claimant’s complaints about redundancy payments and notice payments. The complaints were presented outside the relevant time to present the complaints. It was not just and equitable to extend time for claiming a redundancy payment. It was reasonably practicable to make the claim for breach of contract within the relevant time for making a claim.
Approved by:
Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto
20 April 2026
JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON
.27 May 2026…............................................
…………………............................................ . FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE
Notes Full reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, full written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision. If full written reasons are provided they will be placed online.
All judgments (apart from judgments under Rule 51) and any full written reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions
Case Number: 3310779/2024 & 3310780/2024
Page 2 of 2
shortly after a copy has been sent to the [NAME].
If a Tribunal hearing has been recorded, you may request a transcript of the recording. Unless there are exceptional circumstances, you will have to pay for it. If a transcript is produced it will not include any oral judgment or reasons given at the hearing. The transcript will not be checked, approved or verified by a judge. There is more information in the joint Presidential Practice Direction on the Recording and Transcription of Hearings and accompanying Guidance, which can be found here:
www.judiciary.uk/guidance-and-resources/employment-rules-and-legislation- practice-directions/
📊 How courts decide similar cases
Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:
- Employment Tribunal Unfair Dismissal Claim Rejected Due to Capability Issues
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Case Due to Lack of Attendance
- Employment Tribunal Claim Dismissed: No Attendance, Insufficient Service Period
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects Race Discrimination Complaints Against Royal Ma…
- Employment Tribunal Home Office Wins Disability Discrimination Case at Employment Tribunal
- Employment Tribunal Late Filing Costs Claimant: Unfair & Wrongful Dismissal Claims Rejected
- Employment Tribunal Claimant's Employment Claims Dismissed by Employment Judge Lancaster
- Employment Tribunal Employment Tribunal Rejects All Discrimination Claims Against DVLA
A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The claimant did not present their complaints within the relevant time limit.
- The employer was not required to provide additional information or hold a hearing if the employee failed to attend or supply necessary details.
- The claimant's allegations were not supported by evidence, leading to dismissal.
- The claimant did not meet the legal requirements for claiming redundancy under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
- The employer had reasonable grounds to dismiss based on actions rather than discriminatory reasons.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The employment tribunal dismissed the claimant's complaints about redundancy and notice payments as they were presented outside the relevant time limit.
Who was involved?
A worker (the claimant) against an employer (Leisuredyne Resources Limited).
How did the court decide, and why?
The tribunal decided that it was not just and equitable to extend the time for claiming redundancy payment and that it was reasonably practicable to make the breach of contract claim within the relevant time.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were cited in this judgment.
What argument mattered most?
The timing of when the claims were presented outside the allowed timeframe was crucial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
Against the claimant, as their complaints were dismissed.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone must ensure they present any claims about redundancy and notice payments within the relevant time limit to avoid dismissal.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The timing of when the claims were presented was critical, but specific evidence is not detailed.
Can a decision like this be appealed?
Yes, decisions from an Employment Tribunal can often be appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal.
Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?
It's advisable to seek legal advice from a qualified solicitor for such cases.