Case 1806287/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Y Mohammed v Impact Education Multi Academy Trust HELD by: CVP — 2021
- Case reference
- 1806287/2020
- Decision date
- 31 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Shulman REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Y Mohammed
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr Y Mohammed was employed as a sports coach and physical training instructor from 1 September 2005 until he was dismissed on 11 March 2020. He presented his tribunal claim on 18 October 2020. The tribunal noted that this was over four months late for the unfair dismissal and race discrimination claims, and over six months late for the religion or belief discrimination claim.
The tribunal accepted that the claimant had discussed his employment rights with Mr Zaheer Hanif, who had advised him on time limits, and later with Mr Younis Lunat, an employment specialist. It found that the claimant knew of his right to bring tribunal proceedings from the outset, including from his appeal correspondence and a telephone discussion on 11 March 2020. The tribunal also recorded that the claimant entered early conciliation on 23 September 2020 and received the certificate on 28 September 2020, but found that this did not assist because the referral was outside the primary limitation period.
The tribunal found the claimant to be an unreliable witness. It considered the period after Mr Lunat was instructed, the lack of any adequate explanation for the delay between early September 2020 and the presentation of the claim on 18 October 2020, and the claimant's evidence about what he knew and when. Applying section 111(2)(b) Employment Relations Act 1996 to the unfair dismissal claim and section 123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010 to the discrimination claims, and referring to Pearce v Bank of America Merrill Lynch and Others, the tribunal held that it was not reasonably practicable to extend time for the unfair dismissal claim and not just and equitable to extend time for either discrimination claim. All three claims were dismissed.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Presented on 18 October 2020 after dismissal on 11 March 2020; the tribunal held it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been issued within the three-month limit and declined to extend time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Presented out of time; the tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend the three-month limitation period. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Presented more than six months after the alleged act; the tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- s.111(2)(b) Employment Relations Act 1996
- s.123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- Pearce v Bank of America Merrill Lynch and Others UKEAT/0067/19/LA
- reasonably practicable
- 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.