Case 2201678/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Ms O Anton Altamirano v TikTok Information Technologies UK Limited and 1 other — 2024
- Case reference
- 2201678/2024
- Decision date
- 29 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Emery REPRESENTATION
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms O Anton Altamirano
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in public before Employment Judge Emery on 27 and 28 August 2024, the tribunal dealt with strike-out and limitation issues rather than the merits. It struck out the complaint that delays in addressing the claimant's grievance were an act of victimisation under Rule 37(1)(a), holding that that complaint had no reasonable prospect of success. The tribunal also recorded that the separate victimisation allegation, that the grievance was not properly considered, was not struck out.
The tribunal found that the claims of direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, disability-related harassment, and failure to make reasonable adjustments had not been presented within the applicable time limit. It nevertheless extended time on a just and equitable basis, so those claims were allowed to proceed.
No liability or remedy was determined at this stage. The judgment sent to the parties on 29 October 2024 is limited to those preliminary issues.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victimisation | Part of claim 1, alleging that delays in addressing the claimant's grievance were an act of victimisation, was struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success; the separate complaint that the grievance was not properly considered was not struck out. | Other | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Direct disability discrimination was not presented within the applicable time limit, but the tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis and the claim will proceed. | Other | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability was not presented within the applicable time limit, but the tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis and the claim will proceed. | Other | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Disability-related harassment was not presented within the applicable time limit, but the tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis and the claim will proceed. | Other | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | The failure to make reasonable adjustments was not presented within the applicable time limit, but the tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis and the claim will proceed. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- Rule 37(1)(a) no reasonable prospect of success
- 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.