Case 2502397/2022 · Employment Tribunal

Respondent: Miss N Khaliq (1) Secretary of State for Justice (2) Brook Street UK Limited (3) Julie Sayer (4) Michael Crowther (5) Glyn Pardoe v Miss N Khaliq and 5 others — 2023

Case reference: 2502397/2022
Decision date: 17 August 2023
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer Appearances

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

7 named

Claimant

Respondent: Miss N Khaliq (1) Secretary of State for Justice (2) Brook Street UK Limited (3) Julie Sayer (4) Michael Crowther (5) Glyn Pardoe

Respondents

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a preliminary hearing in Nottingham on 17 August 2023, heard via CVP, Employment Judge Fredericks-Bowyer considered Miss N Khaliq's claims against the named respondents. The judgment is limited to jurisdiction and does not address the merits of the underlying allegations.

The Tribunal held that the claims had been brought outside the primary time limit. It was not considered just and equitable to extend time to the date on which the claim was presented, so the Tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims and dismissed them.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Breach of contract	The judgment dismisses the claims collectively at a preliminary hearing for being out of time; the extracted text does not break out separate findings for this head of claim.	Dismissed	—	—
Disability discrimination	The judgment dismisses the claims collectively at a preliminary hearing for being out of time; the extracted text does not break out separate findings for this head of claim.	Dismissed	Disability	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The judgment dismisses the claims collectively at a preliminary hearing for being out of time; the extracted text does not break out separate findings for this head of claim.	Dismissed	—	—

Legal tests applied

1 reference

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.