Case 1803916/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Birkenshaw v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police — 2022
- Case reference
- 1803916/2021
- Decision date
- 14 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge A.M.S. Green
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Birkenshaw
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary judgment on limitation rather than a determination of the substantive discrimination allegations. The tribunal recorded that the claimant's claims were out of time for the purposes of section 123(1) of the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal nevertheless held that the claims had been issued within such further period as it considered just and equitable. On that basis, the claims were allowed to proceed despite being out of time. No written reasons were provided in the judgment text unless requested, and no findings on liability or remedy were recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Preliminary judgment only. The tribunal decided the Equality Act 2010 limitation issue, finding the claims were out of time under section 123(1) but were presented within such further period as it considered just and equitable. No merits outcome on the disability discrimination claim is stated in the extracted text. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Equality Act 2010 section 123(1)
- just and equitable extension of 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.