Case 2602949/2020 · Employment Tribunal

In person For the v Ms R.Kight - Counsel — 2022

Case reference: 2602949/2020
Decision date: 31 January 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Goodman

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

In person For the

Respondent

Ms R.Kight - Counsel

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was an open preliminary hearing before Employment Judge O'Rourke on 31 January 2022 to decide whether time should be extended for the Claimant's unfair dismissal and race discrimination claims. The claim was initially presented on 7 August 2020, rejected because the ACAS Early Conciliation number was omitted, and re-presented on 17 August 2020. The tribunal found that the correct presentation date would have been 5 August 2020, so both claims were out of time, even on the earlier attempted date.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Dismissed for want of jurisdiction because it was presented out of time. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present the claim within the three-month time limit and declined to extend time under s.111(2) ERA 1996.	Dismissed	—	—
Race discrimination	Dismissed for want of jurisdiction because it was presented out of time. The tribunal refused to extend time on the just and equitable basis under s.123(1)(b) EqA 2010.	Dismissed	Race	—

Legal tests applied

10 references

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.

Open official judgment PDF on gov.uk

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.