Case 2302122/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2025
- Case reference
- 2302122/2022
- Decision date
- 28 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Morton Date
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal struck out the Claimant's claims for breach of contract, unlawful deduction from wages, and disability discrimination under sections 26 and 27 Equality Act 2010. It found that the contract and wages claims were outside the applicable statutory time limits and that it would have been reasonably practicable for them to have been brought in time.
The Tribunal also found that the victimisation claim identified no protected act, that the First Respondent was not the Claimant's employer for the purposes of the claims, and that the Second Respondent was not a legal entity against whom a contract or employment statute claim could be brought. It concluded that all claims were either outside its jurisdiction or had no reasonable prospect of success.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | The Tribunal held that the breach of contract claim was brought outside the applicable statutory time limit and could reasonably practicably have been brought in time; it also found jurisdictional issues as to the respondents. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The Tribunal held that the unlawful deduction from wages claim was brought outside the applicable statutory time limit and could reasonably practicably have been brought in time; it also found jurisdictional issues as to the respondents. | Struck out | — | — |
| Harassment | The judgment identifies disability discrimination under section 26 Equality Act 2010 and states that all claims had no reasonable prospects of success and/or were outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The Tribunal held that the victimisation claim under section 27 Equality Act 2010 identified no protected act that could have formed the basis of such a claim. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- no reasonable prospects of success
- Article 7 Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order 1996
- s111(2) ERA 1996
- s27 Equality Act 2010
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.