Case 1305395/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Wood v Jaguar Land Rover Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 1305395/2020
- Decision date
- 18 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Hindmarch Representation
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Wood
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt an open preliminary hearing, the Tribunal considered complaints of direct disability discrimination, discrimination related to harassment, and breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments. The complaints concerned the period from mid 2017 to March 2019.
The Tribunal held that those complaints were out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. The complaints were therefore struck out for lack of jurisdiction.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination complaint for the period mid 2017 to March 2019 was found out of time and struck out for lack of jurisdiction. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The text refers to 'discrimination related to harassment'; classified as harassment connected with the disability discrimination complaints, but the extracted wording is brief. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Breach of the duty to make reasonable adjustments for the period mid 2017 to March 2019 was found out of time and struck out for lack of jurisdiction. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable to extend time
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.