Case 1602019/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss R Croot v Home Office — 2023
- Case reference
- 1602019/2021
- Decision date
- 10 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sharp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss R Croot
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal dismissed the Claimant's unauthorised deduction from wages claim for lack of jurisdiction. It found that the claim had been presented outside the statutory time limit under the Employment Rights Act 1996.
The Tribunal also dismissed the Claimant's disability discrimination claims, identified as direct discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment. It found that those claims were presented outside the statutory time limit under s123 Equality Act 2010 and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. The judgment records that the harassment claim would have required a successful amendment application to proceed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction because the claim was presented outside the statutory time limit under the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination and failure to make reasonable adjustments were dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction because they were presented outside the statutory time limit under s123 Equality Act 2010, and the Tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The judgment refers to harassment as part of the disability discrimination claims, noting that harassment would require a successful amendment application to proceed; it was dismissed on the same time-limit jurisdiction basis. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- statutory time limit under the Employment Rights Act 1996
- s123 Equality Act 2010
- 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.