Case 1401475/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Z Jones v Allegis Group Limited and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 1401475/2024
- Decision date
- 15 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Beever Appearances
- Venue
- by CVP
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Miss Z Jones
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Z Jones's complaints against Allegis Group Limited and Astrazeneca UK Limited were dismissed. The tribunal held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear them because the complaints were out of time.
The tribunal further decided that it was not just and equitable to extend time. Oral reasons were given on 30 July 2025 at the CVP hearing before Employment Judge Beever.
The extracted judgment text does not specify the substantive legal basis of the complaints, so the record is limited to the jurisdictional dismissal and the time-bar ruling.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The judgment dismisses the claimant's complaints against both respondents for lack of jurisdiction because they were out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time. The extracted text does not specify the underlying legal claim beyond 'complaints'. | Dismissed | — | — |
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.