Case 2409145/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M Y Toure v The Hut.com Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2409145/2021
- Decision date
- 7 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge KM Ross
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M Y Toure
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr M Y Toure brought a claim against The Hut.com Limited alleging race discrimination and harassment arising from a series of workplace matters, including overtime, training support, probation, suspension, transfer delay, and an alleged intimidation incident in August 2020. The tribunal found that the last complained-of act was no later than August 2020, so the three-month time limit under section 123 Equality Act 2010 expired on 30 November 2020. The claim was not presented until 15 August 2021, almost nine months late.
The tribunal considered whether it was just and equitable to extend time, applying section 123 Equality Act 2010 and the authorities it cited, including British Coal Corporation v Keeble, Southwark LBC v Afolabi, Bexley Community Centre v Robertson, Apelogun-Gabriels v Lambeth LBC, and Robinson v Post Office. It accepted that the claimant said he had been pursuing internal grievances and appeals, but found that most appeals had finished by November 2020 and the final relevant appeal outcome was received on 3 June 2021. Even after that, the claimant waited until 6 July 2021 to contact ACAS and 15 August 2021 to present the claim.
In balancing the factors, the tribunal took into account the claimant's union membership and access to the internet, the length of delay, the lack of a clear explanation for not bringing the claim sooner, and some prejudice to the respondent because key witnesses had left the business. It therefore refused to extend time and held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claims.
For completeness only, the tribunal said that if its limitation decision were wrong it would have considered a deposit order because the claims had little reasonable prospect of success. It referred to Hemdan v Ishmail, Madarassy v Nomura International, Nagarajan v London Regional Transport, and Geller v Yeshrun Hebrew Congregation, and said it would have ordered a deposit of £50 for each of the six allegations. That was an alternative view and not the operative outcome.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The race discrimination claim was presented out of time under section 123 Equality Act 2010 and the tribunal declined to extend time on a just and equitable basis. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Any race-related harassment claim was also treated as out of time and the tribunal did not exercise its discretion to extend the limitation period. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- British Coal Corporation v Keeble & others
- Southwark London Borough Council v Afolabi
- Bexley Community Centre (t/a Leisure Link) v Robertson
- Apelogun-Gabriels v Lambeth London Borough Council & another
- Robinson v Post Office
- s.39(1) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure
- Hemdan v Ishmail
- Madarassy v Nomura International PLC
- Nagarajan v London Regional Transport
- Geller v Yeshrun Hebrew Congregation
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.