Mr N Shah v G4S Cash Solutions (UK) Ltd: 3202359/2020
JUDGMENT
[1]The Claimant did not attend the Tribunal open preliminary hearing.[2]The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to consider the Claimant’s claim for redundancy payment as he was employed at the date of the complaint, 7 September 2020. His claim is therefore dismissed.[3]The Claimant’s application to amend his claim to add complaints of unfair redundancy process and unlawful deduction is refused. The details of the claims are unspecified and the Claimant was not in attendance at Tribunal to clarify them. Further, the Claimant’s application to amend was made on 24 July 2021 which, on the face of it is over 3 months after his resignation from the Respondent in February or March 2021. He would therefore likely to be out of time in respect of such claims. RECONSIDERATION JUDGMENT[1]Following consideration of relevant papers and representations the Claimant’s application to reconsider the judgment issued of 15 September 2021 is refused.[2]The Claimant was an employee at the time of the claim and was not entitled to a redundancy payment.[3]The Claimant’s application to amend his claim to add unfair redundancy process and unlawful deduction of wages was refused.[4]The Claimant complained that he was not dismissed to benefit from a redundancy payment. The Claimant’s claim for unfair dismissal, whether for redundancy or otherwise, requires there to be a dismissal. There was therefore no jurisdiction for this claim to be considered for the amendment which was refused. Case Number: 3202359/2020[5]The Claimant complained of a non payment of a transfer allowance totalling £2500.00. This was a new claim, not clarified until the date of the reconsideration hearing. The clarified amendment application in this regard is well out of time and the prejudice to the Respondent in having to address this new claim with significant jurisdictional problems outweighs the prejudice to the Claimant who had an ample opportunity to raise his claim in this regard more timeously.[6]In these circumstances the original judgment sent to the parties on 15 September remains.