Case 1804369/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Brown v Baxterstorey — 2020
- Case reference
- 1804369/2020
- Decision date
- 17 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Lancaster Representation
- Venue
- Leeds
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Leeds on 15 December 2020, Employment Judge Lancaster considered the claimant's amended claim submitted on 28 July 2020. The judgment states that the claim was out of time in respect of all complaints under the Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal held that it was not just and equitable to extend time. On that basis, the Equality Act complaints were dismissed. The judgment does not record separate findings on the underlying merits of any individual complaint or any monetary remedy.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the claim was presented out of time and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. The judgment referred to all Equality Act 2010 complaints collectively and did not make separate merits findings. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the claim was presented out of time and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. The judgment referred to all Equality Act 2010 complaints collectively and did not make separate merits findings. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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.