Cases→4101040/2025

Claimant v Parks of Hamilton (Townhead Garage) Limited

19 October 2025Before Employment Judge A StrainScotlandremote video

Outcome

Other

Individual claims

Unfair Dismissalnot determined

This was a preliminary hearing solely to determine whether the claim was presented in time. The tribunal found the effective date of termination was 23 January 2025, meaning the claim was in time. The merits of the unfair dismissal claim were not yet determined.

Unlawful Deduction from Wagesnot determined

This was a preliminary hearing solely to determine whether the claim was presented in time. The tribunal found the claim was in time. The merits of the unlawful deductions claim were not yet determined.

Facts

Claimant was a Car Sales Executive who worked for a motor dealership from January 2022. On 17 January 2025, after indicating intention to resign by end of month, he was told his employment was being terminated and to return company car keys. Manager told him he was on 'garden leave' and would be paid until 31 January 2025. On 23 January 2025, HR manager told claimant in phone call he was being paid in lieu of notice. P45 showed leaving date as 17 January 2025. Claimant filed ET1 on 23 May 2025 after ACAS early conciliation.

Decision

Tribunal found that the effective date of termination was 23 January 2025, not 17 January 2025 as respondent contended. The tribunal preferred the claimant's evidence, corroborated by contemporaneous CAB notes, that he was told on 17 January he was on garden leave until 31 January. His knowledge that employment was terminated changed on 23 January when HR explicitly told him he was being paid in lieu of notice. The claim was therefore presented in time.

Practical note

The effective date of termination is determined by when the employee actually knows they have been dismissed and when the dismissal takes effect, not when the employer internally records the termination or issues a P45, particularly where ambiguous language like 'garden leave' is used.

Legal authorities cited

Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood [2018] UKSC 22Newham London Borough v Ward [1985] IRLR 509McMaster v Manchester Airport plc [1998] IRLR 112Widdicombe v Longcombe Software Ltd [1998] 35 ICR 710Fitzgerald v University of Kent at Canterbury [2004] IRLR 300Brown v Southall and Knight [1980] ICR 617Gisda Cyf v Barratt [2010] ICR 1475

Statutes

ERA 1996 s.111(2)(a)ERA 1996 s.97

Case details

Case number
4101040/2025
Decision date
19 October 2025
Hearing type
preliminary
Hearing days
1
Classification
contested

Respondent

Name
Parks of Hamilton (Townhead Garage) Limited
Sector
retail
Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor

Employment details

Role
Car Sales Executive
Service
3 years

Claimant representation

Represented
Yes
Rep type
solicitor
Search for this judgment on GOV.UK →