Case 3303911/2020 · Employment Tribunal

Mr Stuart Neill v Vinci Construction UK Limited — 2021

Case reference: 3303911/2020
Decision date: 26 April 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Bloch QC

Indexed: 20 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr Stuart Neill

Respondent

Vinci Construction UK Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This preliminary hearing dealt with the claimant's age-related harassment claim and direct age discrimination claim. The harassment allegation concerned a comment made on 4 March 2019 during an appeal against a final written warning, while the claim form was presented on 13 April 2020.

The tribunal found that the harassment claim was substantially out of time and was not part of a continuing course of conduct. The later reference to the historic allegation in the disciplinary appeal outcome did not renew the alleged conduct. The claimant gave no sufficient explanation for the delay beyond saying that he was unaware of the time limit, and the tribunal declined to extend time on just and equitable grounds.

For the direct age discrimination claim, the respondent produced training records for comparators. The claimant confirmed that the comparators were appropriate and accepted that they had all received the same training. He withdrew the age discrimination claim, which the tribunal dismissed upon withdrawal. The remaining case was listed for a final hearing before a single judge.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Harassment	The harassment related to age claim was struck out because it was out of time under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010 and the tribunal did not consider it just and equitable to extend time.	Struck out	Age	—
Age discrimination	The direct age discrimination claim was dismissed upon withdrawal after the claimant accepted, having seen comparator training records, that the named comparators had received the same training.	Withdrawn	Age	—

Legal tests applied

3 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.