Case 3302456/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr E. Hammer, Solicitor For the v Mr D. Flood, CounselHendley, consultant — 2023
- Case reference
- 3302456/2022
- Decision date
- 27 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge McNeill KC
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr E. Hammer, Solicitor For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary hearing before Employment Judge McNeill KC at Watford on 2 March 2023. The Claimant brought claims of direct and indirect age discrimination against Selectaglaze Ltd. The tribunal recorded that the claim had been presented on 28 February 2022, nearly 16 months after expiry of the three-month primary time limit in section 123(1)(a).
Having heard evidence and submissions from both parties, the tribunal held that it was not just and equitable to extend time to 28 February 2022. The age discrimination claim was therefore dismissed. No monetary remedy was awarded or assessed in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The claim covered direct and indirect age discrimination. It was presented nearly 16 months after expiry of the three-month primary time limit in section 123(1)(a), and the tribunal decided it was not just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Age | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- section 123(1)(a)
- 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.