Claimant v Fonab Castle Hotel Ltd
Outcome
Individual claims
Claim was time-barred. Payment should have been received by 30 August 2024 (or 21 September per claimant's account). Even with ACAS early conciliation extension, the deadline was at latest 2 January 2025. Claim not lodged until 24 January 2025. Claimant gave no explanation why it was not reasonably practicable to submit in time. Tribunal also found claim not actively pursued as claimant failed to attend hearing and provided no specification of claim.
Claimant alleged bullying, loss of possessions, and workplace disputes with colleagues, but these did not constitute claims within tribunal jurisdiction. No protected characteristic was invoked, and with less than two years' service, no unfair dismissal claim was available. Tribunal had no jurisdiction over these complaints.
Facts
The claimant worked for a hotel in Pitlochry from 7 July to 19 August 2024 (approx 1.5 months). She resigned following workplace disputes with colleagues involving alleged bullying and loss of possessions. She received 6.4 days holiday pay in her final pay packet on 30 August 2024. She commenced ACAS early conciliation on 26 November 2024 and filed her claim on 24 January 2025. She did not attend the preliminary hearing on 24 March 2025, sending an email that morning stating she had not completed preparation or contacted witnesses.
Decision
The tribunal dismissed the claim as time-barred and for having no reasonable prospect of success. The holiday pay claim was significantly out of time (filed 24 January when deadline was at latest 2 January 2025 with ACAS extensions), with no explanation given for the delay. The tribunal also found the claimant was not actively pursuing her claim, evidenced by non-attendance at the hearing and failure to provide any specification of her holiday pay claim despite the respondent setting out their position in the ET3.
Practical note
Claimants must comply with strict time limits even for straightforward claims like holiday pay, and failure to attend hearings without adequate explanation will result in strike-out, particularly where the claim is already time-barred and lacks specification.
Legal authorities cited
Statutes
Case details
- Case number
- 8000210/2025
- Decision date
- 27 March 2025
- Hearing type
- preliminary
- Hearing days
- 1
- Classification
- contested
Respondent
- Sector
- hospitality
- Represented
- Yes
- Rep type
- barrister
Employment details
- Service
- 1 months
Claimant representation
- Represented
- No