Case 2410300/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Hughes v Esure Services Ltd — 2024
- Case reference
- 2410300/2023
- Decision date
- 14 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Serr REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Hughes
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 3 June 2024 before Employment Judge Serr, the tribunal considered the claimant's sex discrimination complaints and his application to amend the claim to add further sex discrimination allegations. The tribunal held that the discrimination complaints had not been presented within the applicable time limit and that it was not just and equitable to extend time, so those complaints were dismissed.
The tribunal also refused the claimant's application to amend his claim to add additional sex discrimination claims. The judgment does not record any monetary remedy, and no compensation or award was made at this stage.
The claimant's unfair dismissal complaint was not determined at this hearing and remained listed for a future hearing on 12 to 14 November 2024 before a judge alone by CVP.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The tribunal found the sex discrimination complaints were presented outside the applicable time limit and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. The application to amend the claim to add additional sex discrimination claims was refused. | Dismissed | Sex | — |
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.