Case 3204632/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Wheeler v Vision Redbridge Culture and Leisure Ltd. — 2023
- Case reference
- 3204632/2022
- Decision date
- 12 June 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Burgher Appearances
- Venue
- East London Hearing Centre
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr C Wheeler
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the hearing on 9 June 2023 before Acting Regional Employment Judge Burgher, the tribunal decided that it had no jurisdiction to consider the Claimant's complaints for unfair constructive dismissal and unlawful deduction of wages because they had been presented outside the time limit prescribed by the Employment Rights Act 1996. Those complaints were therefore not determined on the merits.
The tribunal also decided that it had no jurisdiction to consider the Claimant's complaints for direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, indirect disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments and unlawful discrimination because they had been presented outside the time limit prescribed by the Equality Act 2010. It found that it was not just and equitable to extend time.
All of the Claimant's claims were dismissed. The judgment records no monetary award.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The judgment describes this as a complaint for unfair constructive dismissal. The tribunal held that it had no jurisdiction to consider it because it had been presented outside the time limit prescribed by the Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal held that this complaint was presented outside the time limit prescribed by the Employment Rights Act 1996 and therefore could not be considered. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal treated the Claimant's disability discrimination complaints as direct disability discrimination, discrimination arising from disability, indirect disability discrimination, failure to make reasonable adjustments and unlawful discrimination. It held that they were presented outside the time limit prescribed by the Equality Act 2010 and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- time limit prescribed by the Employment Rights Act 1996
- time limit prescribed by the Equality Act 2010
- not 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.