Case 2400262/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Ashton Medical Group — 2024
- Case reference
- 2400262/2022
- Decision date
- 29 January 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Childe REPRESENTATION
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Manchester on 23 January 2024, Employment Judge Childe considered complaints of unlawful discrimination on the grounds of age, sex and marriage, together with a complaint for dismissal due to discrimination. The written record states that the reasons were given orally at the hearing.
The tribunal held that the discrimination complaints were not presented within the applicable time limit. It also found that it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit. On that basis, none of the complaints proceeded to a merits hearing.
All of the complaints were therefore dismissed. No monetary remedy was awarded or recorded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because it was presented outside the applicable time limit and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because it was presented outside the applicable time limit and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
| Marriage or civil partnership discrimination | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because it was presented outside the applicable time limit and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Marriage / civil partnership | — |
| Other | The extracted text refers only to a 'complaint for dismissal due to discrimination'; it was dismissed on the same time-limit basis, with no separate statutory label stated in the extract. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable to extend the time limit
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.