Case 3301837/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Islington LBC — 2021
- Case reference
- 3301837/2020
- Decision date
- 27 January 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge George Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal heard the case on 27 January 2021 before Employment Judge George. It held that the unfair dismissal claim was out of time and that it did not have jurisdiction to consider it. Although the claimant said the effective date of termination was 22 June 2019, the tribunal considered the dismissal letter of 22 May 2019 and found that, in any event, the claim was not presented within a reasonable further period after the limitation date.
On the delay issue, the tribunal found that the claimant knew the facts underlying his claim, knew he had a right to bring proceedings, and knew there was a time limit. It did not accept that he reasonably relied on advice that he had six months to present a claim, noting that he had access to union solicitors and could have checked the position. The tribunal accepted that he had personal difficulties after losing his job, including sleeping in his car for part of 2019, but found those matters did not stop him from pursuing his appeal or from taking steps to challenge aspects of the dismissal process.
The race discrimination, harassment and victimisation claims were also found to be out of time under the Equality Act 2010, and the tribunal was not persuaded to extend time on a just and equitable basis. It recorded allegations about ignored complaints of racial discrimination, the appeal process, and alleged issues affecting BAME staff, but noted that the case was not sufficiently particularised and that the delay was not reasonably explained. It therefore dismissed all claims and made no award.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed on jurisdiction/time-limit grounds. The tribunal held it was reasonably practicable to present the claim within three months of the effective date of termination and that it was not presented within a reasonable further period thereafter. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Out of time under s.123 Equality Act 2010 and the tribunal was not persuaded that it was just and equitable to extend time. The allegations included dismissal, ignored complaints of racial discrimination, the appeal process, and alleged issues concerning promotion of BAME staff, but the case was not sufficiently particularised. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Harassment | Out of time and not extended. The harassment allegations were pleaded with the race discrimination and victimisation complaints. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Victimisation | Out of time and not extended. The tribunal did not reach the merits because it found the claim was not presented within three months of the acts complained of and that it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.111 ERA 1996 reasonably practicable test
- s.123 Equality Act 2010 just and equitable extension
- s.140B(4) Equality Act 2010
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.