Case 1310245/2020 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Mr M Warren-Jones — 2021
- Case reference
- 1310245/2020
- Decision date
- 2 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dean
Parties
2 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal, sitting alone before Employment Judge Dean, found that Mr K Marston was disabled by reason of dyslexia. It also recorded that his employment with Kerry Ingredients (UK) Ltd terminated on 2 July 2020.
The judgment did not determine the substantive merits of the complaints. Instead, it held that the claims were presented out of time and that the Tribunal therefore did not have jurisdiction to entertain them.
The result recorded in the judgment was that the complaints under case number 1310245/2020 were dismissed. No monetary award was made and no separate remedy findings were recorded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment does not break the dismissal down by allegation; it states that the claimant was disabled by reason of dyslexia, but that the complaints were presented out of time and were dismissed for want of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment does not separately analyse the unfair dismissal complaint; it records that the claimant's employment terminated on 2 July 2020 and that the complaints were out of time and dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.