Case 2601104/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Ms S Svosve v Four Care Plus Limited — 2022
- Case reference
- 2601104/2021
- Decision date
- 23 July 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge K Welch
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms S Svosve
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt an open preliminary hearing before Employment Judge K Welch, sitting alone at Nottingham Employment Tribunal on 12 July 2022, the tribunal considered Ms S Svosve's race discrimination claims against Four Care Plus Limited. The respondent was represented by Ms C Lord, Counsel, and the claimant by Ms Cornaglia, Counsel.
The tribunal held that the claims of discrimination on the grounds of race were submitted out of time. It further decided that it was not just and equitable to extend time, with the result that the claims were dismissed.
Because the claims were dismissed at the preliminary hearing, the hearing listed for 9 to 13 January 2023 was vacated. The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in accordance with the tribunal's note.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | At an open preliminary hearing on 12 July 2022, the tribunal held that the race discrimination claims were submitted out of time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.