Case 2603086/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Hamilton in person For the v Respondent — 2021
- Case reference
- 2603086/2020
- Decision date
- 9 July 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge R Clark
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr Hamilton in person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the open preliminary hearing on 29 June 2021, Employment Judge R Clark, sitting alone, considered whether the claimant's discrimination claims were in time. The tribunal held that the direct race discrimination claims were presented out of time, that it was not just and equitable to extend time, and that those claims were struck out. The tribunal also said that, had jurisdiction been established, the race claims would have been struck out because they had no reasonable prospect of success.
The tribunal reached the same outcome for the direct age discrimination allegations relating to events in 2013 and 2017. Those allegations were found to have been presented out of time, the tribunal declined to extend time, and it stated that they would also have been struck out for no reasonable prospect of success.
A remaining direct age discrimination claim, relating to events in or around October/November 2019, was also presented out of time, but the tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time for presentation of that claim. No monetary award was made at this hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recordedThis case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.
| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Direct race discrimination claims were presented out of time; the tribunal refused to extend time and said that, if jurisdiction had been established, they would also have been struck out for no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | Direct age discrimination allegations relating to events in 2013 and 2017 were presented out of time; the tribunal refused to extend time and said they would also have been struck out for no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Age discrimination | The remaining direct age discrimination claim relating to events in or around October/November 2019 was presented out of time, but the tribunal held it was just and equitable to extend time for presentation of that claim. | Other | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- just and equitable to extend time
- no reasonable prospect of success
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.