Case 2409593/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr. S Greeves v Stamford Products Limited — 2021
- Case reference
- 2409593/2020
- Decision date
- 2 November 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr. S Greeves
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant presented claims for unfair dismissal and disability discrimination after his dismissal by the respondent. The tribunal found that the unfair dismissal claim was presented outside the statutory time limit and that it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time, so that claim was dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
The tribunal found that from late January 2020 the claimant was a disabled person for the purposes of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. It accepted that his mental health, advice about time limits, and the timing of Early Conciliation explained the delay in bringing the disability discrimination claims.
The tribunal concluded that this was an exceptional case in which it was just and equitable to extend time for the disability discrimination claims to 7 August 2020. Those claims were therefore within jurisdiction and were to proceed to a further preliminary hearing to settle particulars and give directions.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was presented outside the prescribed period and was dismissed as outside the tribunal's jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal extended time for presentation of the disability discrimination claims and found them within jurisdiction, but did not determine the merits in this preliminary judgment. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
11 references- section 6 Equality Act 2010
- section 111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 123 Equality Act 2010
- Hutchison v Westward Television Ltd
- British Coal Corporation v Keeble
- Mills and Crown Prosecution Service v Marshall
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre
- Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan
- Edomobi v La Retraite RC Girls School
- Chohan v Derby Law Centre
- Wright v Wolverhampton City Council
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.