Sodexo Ltd

Case Summary

Mr Noronha brought claims of unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction of wages against Sodexo Ltd. The tribunal held a preliminary hearing to determine whether the claims were presented out of time and whether it was reasonably practicable to present them within the statutory time limit.

The tribunal found that the claimant failed to present his claims within the primary three-month time limit under s.111(2) Employment Rights Act 1996, and that it was reasonably practicable for him to have done so. Accordingly, the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear the claims.

Use these claim-type pages to compare this decision with other published tribunal cases, outcome patterns, and visible award data.

• •Whether claim was presented within primary time limit
• •Whether it was reasonably practicable to present claim in time
• •Jurisdiction to hear unfair dismissal and unlawful deduction of wages claims

1 EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS Claimant: Mr Savio Noronha Respondent: Sodexo Ltd. RECORD OF A PUBLIC PRELIMINARY HEARING Heard at: Watford Employment Tribunal On: 16 April 2026 Before: Employment Judge Alliott Representation Claimant: In person Respondent: Mr Dominic Bayne (counsel) JUDGMENT The judgment of the tribunal is that: 1. The claimant’s claim was not presented within the primary time limit and it was reasonably practicable to have done so. 2. The claimant’s claims of unfair dismissal and for unauthorised deduction of wages/breach of contract are struck out as there is no jurisdiction to hear them. REASONS Introduction 1. This public preliminary hearing was ordered by Employment Judge Young on 16 February 2026 to consider whether the claimant’s claims were presented out of time, whether it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time, and whether it was presented within a reasonable time thereafter. The law 2. Section 111(2) Employment Rights Act 1996 provides as follows:- “111 Complaints to employment tribunal. ... 2 (2) ... an employment tribunal shall not consider a complaint under this sec- tion unless it is presented to the tribunal— (a) before the end of the period of three months beginning with the effective date of termination, or (b) within such further period as the tribunal considers reasonable in a case where it is satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable for the complaint to be presented before the end of that period of three months.” 3. Section 23 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 is in similar terms. 4. As per the IDS Employment Law Handbook “Employment Tribunal Practice and Procedure” 5. At 5.46:- “When a claimant tries to excuse late presentation of his or her ET1 claim form on the ground that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim with…