Case 1405574/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms Jennifer Stewart v Mr Luke Guinness PUBLIC PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2024
- Case reference
- 1405574/2023
- Decision date
- 17 September 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge O’Rourke Dated
- Venue
- Bristol
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms Jennifer Stewart
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a public preliminary hearing to determine time limits for the claimant's age discrimination complaint and the related notice pay claim. The tribunal found that the effective date of termination was 4 August 2022, when Mr Guinness told Ms Stewart that she could not continue to work for him. The tribunal rejected Ms Stewart's case that her engagement continued to June 2023, finding that later emails and WhatsApps did no more than confirm the earlier decision and that there was no continuing act for limitation purposes.
Applying the discretion under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010, the tribunal referred to Robertson v Bexley Community Centre, Southwark LBC v Afolabi, Lupetti v Wrens Old House Ltd, and Sougrin v Haringey Health Authority. It accepted that the claim was brought about ten months out of time, but found that Ms Stewart's reasons for delay were not satisfactory, describing her belief that the relationship had not ended, or that there had been a continuing act, as unreasonable and illogical on the evidence. The tribunal also found that the claim had little merit, noting that the only asserted basis was the timing of the comparator's appointment and that there was no supporting evidence of discriminatory motivation.
The tribunal held that it would not be just and equitable to extend time, so the age discrimination claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Because the age discrimination claim did not proceed, the breach of contract claim in respect of notice pay was also dismissed in accordance with the earlier case management agreement. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | Dismissed for want of jurisdiction after the tribunal found the claim was presented about ten months out of time and refused to extend time on just and equitable grounds. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Breach of contract | Dismissed in accordance with the agreement reached at the case management hearing of 15 April 2024, because the age discrimination claim was not proceeding. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre t/a Leisure Link [2003] IRLR 434
- Southwark London Borough Council v Afolabi [2003] ICR 800
- Lupetti v Wrens Old House Ltd [1984] ICR 348
- Sougrin v Haringey Health Authority [1992] ICR 650
- s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- s.123(3)(a) Equality Act 2010
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.