Case 1803483/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs. L Craven v E B Bradshaw & Sons Ltd — 2020
- Case reference
- 1803483/2020
- Decision date
- 15 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Buckley Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs. L Craven
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a remote preliminary hearing on 14 December 2020, Employment Judge Buckley dealt only with limitation and jurisdiction. The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim was submitted out of time and dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction. It accepted that it was not reasonably practicable to present that claim in time, but found it was not presented within a reasonable period afterwards.
The discrimination claims were also out of time, but the tribunal allowed them to proceed because it was just and equitable to do so. The judgment refers to those claims only generically as discrimination claims and does not set out the underlying facts or determine liability on the merits.
The judgment records the claimant’s effective date of termination as 23 January 2020. No compensation or other remedy was assessed at this hearing, because the decision was confined to the preliminary issue.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on a preliminary jurisdiction issue because the claim was submitted out of time. The tribunal accepted it was not reasonably practicable to submit in time, but found it was not submitted within a reasonable period thereafter. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the discrimination claims were allowed to proceed because it was just and equitable to do so. The text does not identify the protected characteristic(s) expressly; disability is inferred from the case listing. | Other | Disability | — |
| Sex discrimination | The judgment records that the discrimination claims were allowed to proceed because it was just and equitable to do so. The text does not identify the protected characteristic(s) expressly; sex is inferred from the case listing. | Other | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- not reasonably practicable
- reasonable period thereafter
- just and equitable
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.