Case 2602848/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Grant v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2023
- Case reference
- 2602848/2022
- Decision date
- 23 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Butler
- Venue
- Nottingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Grant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing, Employment Judge M Butler, sitting alone, struck out the claims on jurisdictional grounds. The judgment records that reasons were given orally at the hearing, with written reasons to be provided only if requested within 14 days.
The unfair dismissal claim was struck out because it was presented outside the statutory time limit under section 111(2)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, and the Tribunal found that it had been reasonably practicable to present it in time.
The disability discrimination claim was also struck out because it was presented outside the time limit under section 123(1)(a), and the Tribunal found that it was not just and equitable to extend time for presentation.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Struck out because the claim was presented outside the time limit in section 111(2)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and the Tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to have presented it in time. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Struck out because the claim was presented outside the time limit in section 123(1)(a) and the Tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 111(2)(a) of the Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 123(1)(a)
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.