Case 2410838/2019 · Employment Tribunal
in person For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 2410838/2019
- Decision date
- 3 March 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson Appearances
Parties
1 namedClaimant
in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal held that Miss Yusuf’s Equality Act claim was not presented in time under section 123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010. It also found that it was not just and equitable to extend time under section 123(1)(b) for a period that would have treated the claim as being in time.
Because the claim was out of time and no extension was granted, the Tribunal said it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim and dismissed it. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would follow unless requested in accordance with the note at the end of the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The Tribunal held the claim was not presented in time under section 123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010 and that it was not just and equitable to extend time under section 123(1)(b). The claim was therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010
- section 123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable to extend time
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.