Case 2300471/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Kwast v London United Busways Ltd — 2019
- Case reference
- 2300471/2019
- Decision date
- 6 April 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Freer Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Kwast
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing at London South Tribunals on 18 March 2019, the Claimant did not attend and the Respondent was represented by a solicitor.
The Tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to consider the Claimant's claims having regard to the applicable statutory time limits. Reasons were given orally at the hearing, and the written judgment does not set out further reasoning or address remedy.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the Claimant's claims having regard to applicable statutory time limits. The unfair dismissal claim is identified from the case listing categories rather than separately set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The judgment records that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the Claimant's claims having regard to applicable statutory time limits. The breach of contract claim is identified from the case listing categories rather than separately set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The judgment records that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the Claimant's claims having regard to applicable statutory time limits. The disability discrimination claim is identified from the case listing categories rather than separately set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | The judgment records that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to consider the Claimant's claims having regard to applicable statutory time limits. The race discrimination claim is identified from the case listing categories rather than separately set out in the judgment text. | Dismissed | Race | — |
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.