Case 2200135/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr L Hasan v Ucl — 2021
- Case reference
- 2200135/2020
- Decision date
- 22 December 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Norris
- Venue
- Central London
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr L Hasan
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Norris, sitting alone via CVP, struck out two complaints brought in case number 2200135/2020 as the Claimant's sixth claim. The complaints were pleaded as failures to make reasonable adjustments, one concerning a request to adjourn a disciplinary investigation meeting in early July 2019 and the other concerning a request to adjourn a grievance interview on 12 September 2019.
The tribunal held that the complaints were struck out because they were presented out of time and the Claimant stood no reasonable prospect of showing why time should be extended, and/or because they were an abuse of process. The judgment records that the strike out was made pursuant to Rule 37(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.
Written reasons had already been given on 27 November 2021. No monetary remedy was awarded in this decision.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Complaint that the Respondent failed to make a reasonable adjustment between about 4 July 2019 and some days thereafter by not acceding to the Claimant's request to adjourn a disciplinary investigation meeting. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Complaint that the Respondent failed to make a reasonable adjustment by not acceding to the Claimant's request to adjourn a grievance interview on 12 September 2019 for at least one day. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(1)(a) Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
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.