Case 1403948/2020 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1403948/2020
- Decision date
- 30 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Bristol by video on 1 October 2021 before Employment Judge A Richardson, the Tribunal held that Mr S Kamalarajan’s claim of unlawful deduction from wages was brought in time. The judgment did not decide the merits of that wage claim, and no monetary award was made in this decision.
The Tribunal dismissed the unfair dismissal claim. It found that the claim had been brought out of time and that it was reasonably practicable for it to have been brought in time. The disability discrimination and race discrimination claims were also dismissed because they were brought out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time.
The schedule to the judgment records incident-by-incident amendment rulings under the Equality Act 2010. It notes that some amendments were allowed in respect of race for incidents dated 9 April 2020, 14 April 2020 and 30 April 2020, while amendments were not allowed in respect of disability where stated. Other amendment applications, including those described under sections 13, 19 and 26, were refused. The operative judgment nevertheless dismissed the discrimination claims on limitation grounds.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal held that the claim was brought in time. The judgment does not determine the merits of the wage claim. | Other | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | The Tribunal found the claim was brought out of time and that it was reasonably practicable for it to have been brought in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The Tribunal found the disability discrimination claims were brought out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. The schedule to the judgment also records amendment requests refused in respect of disability where noted. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The Tribunal found the race discrimination claims were brought out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. The schedule to the judgment records that some incident-specific amendments were allowed in respect of race, but the claim was still dismissed as out of time. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- 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.