Case 1401603/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Marina Akarepi v Dice Quest Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 1401603/2021
- Decision date
- 21 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Halliday Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Marina Akarepi
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningBy consent, the tribunal recorded that Miss Marina Akarepi was an employee of Dice Quest Limited for the purposes of section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and section 83 of the Equality Act 2010. It also found that she had a disability within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the time of the events relied on in the disability claims.
The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed at the preliminary hearing. The tribunal found that the claim had been issued outside the statutory time limit under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and that it had been reasonably practicable for it to have been presented in time.
The sex discrimination and disability discrimination claims were also found to have been issued outside the section 123 Equality Act 2010 time limit, taking into account only the last act relied on. However, the tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time in all the circumstances, so those claims could proceed.
The judgment was limited to limitation and status issues. The tribunal stated that no decision was made on earlier events relied on and no determination was made as to whether there was conduct extending over a period.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was issued outside the statutory time limit under section 111 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for it to have been presented in time, so the claim was dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The sex discrimination claim was issued outside the statutory time limit under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010, but the tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time in all the circumstances. No merits decision was made and the claim was allowed to proceed. | Other | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal found the claimant had a disability as defined in section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 at the time of the events relied on for the disability claims. It held that the disability discrimination claim was out of time under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010, but it was just and equitable to extend time, so the claim could proceed. No merits decision was made. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.230 ERA 1996
- s.83 Equality Act 2010
- s.6 Equality Act 2010
- s.111 ERA 1996
- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- reasonably practicable
- 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.