Miss N Smith-Nardi v The Organic Larder Ltd: 3200436/2019
JUDGMENT
Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013 – Rule 21[1]It was not reasonably practicable for the Claimant to have presented her claim in time. The Claimant presented her second claim without undue delay thereafter. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear the complaints.[2]The Respondent failed to pay the Claimant wages which were properly due and owing in the sum of £15.66.[3]The Respondent failed to pay the Claimant her one week’s notice on termination and owes her the sum of £117.45.[4]The Respondent must therefore pay to the Claimant the total sum of £133.11[5]The hearing listed on 3 July 2019 is cancelled.REASONS
[1]By a claim form presented on 21 February 2019, the Claimant brought complaints of unauthorised deductions from wages in respect of her pay and notice period. Her employment terminated on 23 November 2018. The letter of termination states that she was entitled to one week’s pay in lieu of notice. This was not paid.[2]The Claimant contacted ACAS for the purposes of early conciliation on 28 January 2019. The certificate was issued on 12 February 2019. The name of the Respondent was The Organic Larder Limited. This was the company by whom she was employed. 4.17 Rule 21 judgment – universal template. 01/01/14 Case No: 3200436/2019[3]The claim form presented on 21 February 2019 named Ms Hilary Penning as the Respondent. Ms Penning was the founder of the company and the Claimant’s manager. The Tribunal notes that it is a common error for unrepresented claimants to name their actual manager rather than the company by whom they were employed. This is understandable as box 2.1 asks for the name of the employer or the person against whom the claim is made.[4]The Tribunal rejected the first claim form. It did not notify the Claimant of the rejection until 19 March 2019.[5]By letter dated 20 March 2019, the Claimant presented an amended claim form, crossing out Ms Pelling’s name and writing in that of the Respondent.[6]Time expired on 11 March 2019. If the Claimant had been told about the error in her claim form upon receipt, I am satisfied that she would have amended it and represented it very swiftly and certainly before time expired. The only reason that she did not was because the Tribunal did not respond until after time had expired. Until 19 March 2019, the Claimant had no reason to think that her claim had not been accepted.[7]In the circumstances, it was not reasonably practicable to have presented the amended claim in time. The Claimant presented the claim the very next day. She acted without undue delay.[8]The Respondent has not presented a Response. The Claimant is entitled to be paid for the unauthorised deduction from her wages and her notice pay. The total sum due is £133.11.