Case 2203105/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Barklem, counsel v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2203105/2022
- Decision date
- 18 April 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge E Burns
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr C Barklem, counsel
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe hearing determined preliminary limitation issues. The claimant's constructive unfair dismissal complaint and discrimination and victimisation complaints were accepted to have been presented outside the ordinary time limits, so the tribunal considered whether the unfair dismissal complaint met the reasonably practicable test and whether time should be extended for the Equality Act complaints.
The tribunal dismissed the constructive unfair dismissal complaint because it found the claim was out of time and that it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time. The tribunal allowed the direct sex discrimination claims to proceed, finding that although they were out of time it was just and equitable to extend time.
The tribunal dismissed the disability discrimination, disability-related harassment, and victimisation complaints. It considered the delay, the number and age of the allegations, and the hardship to the respondent in having to answer them, and was not persuaded that it was just and equitable to allow those claims to proceed. The claimant's anonymity application was also refused.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment describes this as a constructive unfair dismissal complaint. It was presented outside the normal time limit, and the tribunal was not satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Sex discrimination | The direct sex discrimination claims were out of time, but the tribunal found it just and equitable to extend time, so they were permitted to proceed to a full merits hearing. | Other | Sex | — |
| Disability discrimination | The disability discrimination claims were out of time, and the tribunal was not persuaded that it was just and equitable to allow them to proceed. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The victimisation complaints were treated as arising from further and better particulars submitted on 8 November 2022. The tribunal found they were out of time and did not consider it just and equitable to allow them to proceed. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Harassment | The harassment complaints were related to disability and were dismissed on limitation grounds together with the disability discrimination claims. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
- section 123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- Rule 50 of Schedule 1 of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013
- Broadcasting Corporation v Roden [2015] ICR 985
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.