Case 1302957/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Dutton, lay representative For v Bewdley Youth Café — 2018
- Case reference
- 1302957/2018
- Decision date
- 18 December 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Broughton Appearances
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Dutton, lay representative For
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant was dismissed by letter dated 15 December 2017 with immediate effect, and she accepted that all of her claims related to matters up to and including 22 December 2017, when she had collected that letter. Early conciliation started on 1 March 2018 and ended on 1 April 2018. ACAS later told Mr Dutton on 24 April 2018 that he generally had one month after the end of early conciliation to submit the claim, leaving only a short period before the 1 May 2018 deadline.
The tribunal found that, for the non-discrimination claims, it was reasonably practicable to present them in time and that the eventual delay of more than a month was not reasonable. The judge accepted that the claimant was unwell, but found no evidence that she was so incapacitated that she could not give instructions, and noted that the delay appeared to be because the parties were hoping for a settlement offer. That was not a valid reason for an extension of time.
For the discrimination complaint, which the judgment says was identified as sex and/or religion or belief discrimination but actually alleged on the basis that the claimant was a 'Romany Gipsy', the tribunal found no evidence supporting the allegation. The judge also held that it would not be just and equitable to extend time for that claim. All of the claimant's claims were therefore dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the claim was presented out of time; the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it within the time limit. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The pleaded claim was for whistleblowing detriment and dismissal. It was dismissed as out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The pleaded claim was for unpaid wages and expenses. It was dismissed as out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Dismissed as presented out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The pleaded breach of contract claim was for notice pay. It was dismissed as out of time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The discrimination complaint was described in the judgment as having been pleaded on grounds of sex and/or religion or belief, but the underlying allegation was that the claimant was a 'Romany Gipsy'. The tribunal found no evidence to support it and refused to extend time on the just and equitable basis. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- reasonably practicable test
- s.111(2)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996
- just and equitable test
- s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.