Case 2500235/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Glendinning v Tesco Stores Ltd — 2018
- Case reference
- 2500235/2018
- Decision date
- 14 May 2018
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Johnson Representation
- Venue
- Teesside Justice Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Glendinning
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe preliminary issue was whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear complaints of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. The claimant's employment ended on 24 August 2017, ACAS early conciliation began on 22 November 2017, the certificate was issued on 14 December 2017, and the extended time limit for presenting the claim was 14 January 2018. The ET1 was presented on 13 February 2018, and the claimant accepted that the claims were out of time.
For unfair dismissal, the Tribunal accepted that the claimant genuinely believed his trade union would file the Tribunal claim for him, and found that the union had been aware of the relevant time limit. The delay was attributed to the union's administrative oversight after receiving the claimant's member pack. Applying the authorities on reasonable practicability and advisers' errors, the Tribunal held that the trade union's error, oversight or negligence could not be relied on by the claimant, and that it had been reasonably practicable to present the claim in time.
For disability discrimination, the Tribunal considered the same matters relied on by the claimant: the ongoing appeal process, his depression at the relevant time, and reliance on trade union advisers. It found that the internal appeal did not alter the time limit, that the respondent had not misled the claimant, and that although there may have been a deterioration in the claimant's mental health shortly before Christmas, this did not justify an extension in the circumstances. The Tribunal concluded that it was not just and equitable to extend time and dismissed the discrimination complaint.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed at a preliminary hearing because the claim was presented out of time and the Tribunal was not satisfied that it was not reasonably practicable to present it within the three-month time limit. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The disability discrimination complaints, described as section 15 Equality Act 2010 and failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21, were dismissed at a preliminary hearing because they were presented out of time and the Tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
10 references- s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
- Asda Stores Limited v Kauser
- Dedman v British Building & Engineering Appliances Limited
- Wall's Meat Company Limited v Khan
- Marks & Spencer Plc v Williams-Ryan
- Northamptonshire County Council v Entwhistle
- Keeble Factors
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.