Case 1303155/2018 · Employment Tribunal

in person For the v Mr D Bansal (Solicitor) The — 2018

Case reference: 1303155/2018
Decision date: 7 September 2018
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Wynn-Evans

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

in person For the

Respondent

Mr D Bansal (Solicitor) The

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Wynn-Evans sitting alone. The tribunal refused to make a deposit order under rule 39 of the Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2013 and refused to strike out the claim for no reasonable prospect of success. It also permitted the claimant to amend his claim form so that it could include the allegations set out in the further information document sent on 7 September 2018.

The tribunal held that the claimant had not presented his race and religion discrimination complaints within the primary time limit in section 123(1)(a) of the Equality Act 2010, but that they had been presented within a period that the tribunal considered just and equitable under section 123(1)(b). The amended claim was framed as direct discrimination under section 13 and harassment under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 because of race and religion.

No substantive merits determination was made at this hearing, and no remedy was awarded. The judgment therefore records only the procedural rulings that allowed the race and religion discrimination and harassment complaints to proceed.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal refused strike out and a deposit order, allowed amendment to include the further information document, and held the race complaint was not presented in time under s.123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010 but was within a period that was just and equitable under s.123(1)(b). No merits finding was made.	Other	Race	—
Harassment	Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal permitted the claim to be amended to include harassment allegations because of race under s.26 Equality Act 2010. It refused strike out and a deposit order and held the complaint could proceed on a just and equitable basis under s.123(1)(b). No merits finding was made.	Other	Race	—
Religion or belief discrimination	Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal refused strike out and a deposit order, allowed amendment to include the further information document, and held the religion complaint was not presented in time under s.123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010 but was within a period that was just and equitable under s.123(1)(b). No merits finding was made.	Other	Religion or belief	—
Harassment	Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal permitted the claim to be amended to include harassment allegations because of religion under s.26 Equality Act 2010. It refused strike out and a deposit order and held the complaint could proceed on a just and equitable basis under s.123(1)(b). No merits finding was made.	Other	Religion or belief	—

Legal tests applied

5 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.