Case 1601179/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G Evans v Portable Foods Manufacturing Company Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1601179/2023
- Decision date
- 8 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Martin Representation
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G Evans
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal considered whether to extend time on just and equitable grounds for disability discrimination complaints concerning matters in 2014, 2015 and January 2022. It found that the allegations were out of time, were separate allegations rather than a continuing course of action, and that the Claimant had not met the burden of showing that time should be extended.
The Tribunal also considered the Claimant's application to amend to add allegations of victimisation and protected interest disclosure detriment about grievance notes or witness statements and a delay in providing vouchers. It found the proposed amendments raised new causes of action and new factual issues; one was substantially out of time, and the voucher allegation had little or no merit because the vouchers were later provided and the Respondent gave an alternative explanation for the delay.
Accordingly, the Tribunal dismissed the disability discrimination claims for lack of jurisdiction and refused the application for leave to amend.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The Tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction because the disability discrimination complaints were out of time, were not a continuing course of action, and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The Claimant's application to amend to add victimisation allegations was not allowed and was dismissed; the proposed claims were not finally adjudicated on their merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The Claimant's application to amend to add protected interest disclosure allegations was not allowed and was dismissed; the proposed claims were not finally adjudicated on their merits. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable extension of time
- s.33 Limitation Act 1980
- Miller v Ministry of Justice
- Adedeji v University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
- Selkent Bus Company Limited v Moore
- Gillett v Bridge 86 Limited
- Presidential Guidance on applications to amend
- Abercrombie v Aga Rangemaster Limited
- Newquest (Herald and Times) Limited v Keeping
- Foxtons Limited v Ruwiel
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.