Case 2302927/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Killingbeck v Richmond and Wandsworth Council and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 2302927/2024
- Decision date
- 19 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burge REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- London South
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Mr Killingbeck
Respondents
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing before Employment Judge Burge in London South on 12 November 2025, the tribunal held that the Claimant's unfair dismissal claim against Richmond and Wandsworth Council and Mr Seth was presented outside the applicable time limit. It found that it was reasonably practicable for the Claimant to have brought that claim in time, so the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it.
The tribunal also found that the Claimant's direct discrimination and harassment claims were presented outside the applicable time limit. However, it decided that it was just and equitable to extend time for those claims, and they will therefore proceed. The judgment does not determine the merits of those claims and does not record any monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal held that the unfair dismissal claim was brought outside the applicable time limit and that it was reasonably practicable for the Claimant to have brought it in time, so the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | The Claimant's direct discrimination claim was out of time, but the tribunal decided it was just and equitable to extend time, so the claim will proceed. The protected characteristic is not identified in the extracted text. | Other | — | — |
| Harassment | The Claimant's harassment claim was out of time, but the tribunal decided it was just and equitable to extend time, so the claim will proceed. The protected characteristic is not identified in the extracted text. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.