Case 2301668/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 2301668/2019
- Decision date
- 18 December 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Bryant QC
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 18 December 2020, Employment Judge K Bryant QC dismissed case numbers 2300896/2020 and 2301150/2020 because they had been presented out of time and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear them. Those dismissals were procedural and did not involve any substantive findings on the merits of the claims.
In case 2301668/2019, the tribunal struck out the Claimant's claims for unfair dismissal within the meaning of sections 98 and 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and for victimisation within the meaning of section 27 of the Equality Act 2010. The stated basis was that those claims had no reasonable prospect of success.
The tribunal also recorded that, so far as the Claimant had intended to raise a harassment claim related to religion or belief and a claim for unfair dismissal within the meaning of section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996, those claims were withdrawn. The judgment states that there were no remaining live claims.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Case number 2300896/2020 was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Case number 2301150/2020 was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unfair dismissal | In case 2301668/2019, the unfair dismissal claims within the meaning of sections 98 and 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 were struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Victimisation | In case 2301668/2019, the victimisation claim within the meaning of section 27 of the Equality Act 2010 was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Harassment | In case 2301668/2019, the claim for harassment related to religion or belief was withdrawn. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
| Whistleblowing | In case 2301668/2019, the intended unfair dismissal claim within the meaning of section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was withdrawn. | Withdrawn | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- no reasonable prospect of success
- sections 98 and 104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 27 of the Equality Act 2010
- section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996
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.