Case 2219119/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Uszakiewicz-Szczygielski v St James Group Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2219119/2023
- Decision date
- 25 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge B Smith
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Uszakiewicz-Szczygielski
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal struck out the unfair dismissal claim because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires a claimant to have at least two years' service, and the claimant had been employed for less than two years. The tribunal therefore held that she was not entitled to bring unfair dismissal proceedings.
The respondent's application to strike out the direct race discrimination claim was refused. Although that claim had been presented outside the applicable time limit, the tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time, so the claim will proceed.
The tribunal also refused to strike out the harassment relating to race claim in respect of the claimant's dismissal, and extended time on a just and equitable basis for that complaint. However, the other complaints of harassment relating to race were struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) because they had no reasonable prospect of success. The victimisation claim was also struck out under Rule 37(1)(a). No remedy was awarded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 requires two years' service and the claimant had less than two years' service, so she was not entitled to bring the claim. | Struck out | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The direct race discrimination claim was presented out of time, but the tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time and refused the strike-out application, so the claim will proceed. | Other | Race | — |
| Harassment | The harassment claim relating to race in respect of the claimant's dismissal was out of time, but the tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis and refused strike out. The other harassment complaints relating to race were struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) because they had no reasonable prospect of success. | Other | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Struck out under Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a) because it had no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- section 108 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- just and equitable to extend the time limit
- Employment Tribunal Rule 37(1)(a)
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.