Case 3303075/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In Person For the v Mr G Griffiths-Jones, Solicitor — 2021
- Case reference
- 3303075/2020
- Decision date
- 15 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Bedeau Representation
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In Person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the Watford hearing on 15 February 2021 before Employment Judge Bedeau, the tribunal dealt only with time-limit and jurisdiction issues. It held that it was reasonably practicable for Mr Golinski to have presented his constructive unfair dismissal and breach of contract claims within the extended conciliation period, and those claims were therefore struck out because the tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear and determine them.
The tribunal also considered the disability discrimination claims. It decided that it was not just and equitable to extend time for those claims, which had been presented outside the extended conciliation period, and they were struck out for lack of jurisdiction. No monetary award was made.
The written record states that reasons had been given orally at the hearing and that no written reasons would be provided unless requested. The judgment does not record any further factual findings on the merits of the claims beyond the time-limit rulings.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive dismissal | The tribunal held it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented the constructive unfair dismissal claim within the extended conciliation period, so it struck the claim out for lack of jurisdiction. | Struck out | — | — |
| Breach of contract | The tribunal held it was reasonably practicable for the claimant to have presented the breach of contract claim within the extended conciliation period, so it struck the claim out for lack of jurisdiction. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend time for the disability discrimination claims, which had been presented outside the extended conciliation period, and struck them out for lack of jurisdiction. | Struck out | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.