Case 3201718/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr W Way v Restore (Cumbria) — 2019
- Case reference
- 3201718/2019
- Decision date
- 2 October 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gardiner Representation
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr W Way
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a hearing on 2 October 2019 before Employment Judge Gardiner, the tribunal recorded that the claimant, Mr W Way, did not attend and the respondent, Restore Plc, was represented by counsel. The judgment does not identify the substantive allegations in detail, but the case was listed as a disability discrimination matter.
The tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims on the basis that they had been presented out of time. It found that it would not be just and equitable to extend time so that the claims could be considered on their merits. No findings on liability beyond the limitation issue were recorded, and no remedy was awarded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment does not set out the underlying allegations, but the case was listed by gov.uk under Disability Discrimination and the tribunal dismissed the claimant's claims because they were issued out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable extension of 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.