Case 3305258/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr G v C Enachioiu and Wincanton Group Limited Held by CVP on 10 February 2022 — 2022
- Case reference
- 3305258/2021
- Decision date
- 10 February 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Kurrein Statement
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr G
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr G C Enachioiu presented his claim on 1 April 2021. At the preliminary hearing, Employment Judge Kurrein recorded that the ET1 did not tick any claim boxes and only referred to “another type of claim”, described as “bullying and discrimination”. After discussion, the claimant accepted that the only wrongdoing alleged in the ET1 was a threat to cut his hours, said to have occurred in January or February 2020 shortly after his back pain started. The Respondent had accepted that he had reported lower back pain in about January 2020 and had been assigned light duties, and the judge noted an occupational health report saying he was unlikely to be covered by the Equality Act 2010, but no Equality Act claim was determined on the merits.
The tribunal held that the alleged threat to cut his hours was almost 12 months before the relevant cut-off date, given that early conciliation started on 25 March 2021. Judge Kurrein found that the claimant had produced no evidence to justify a just and equitable extension of time, and said that the time issue was conclusive. The judgment also states that, even apart from time, the claim had very dubious prospects of success.
The judgment therefore struck out the claim for having no reasonable prospect of success. The reasons also say the claim “must be dismissed”, but the operative judgment was that the claim had no reasonable prospect of success and was struck out. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | The ET1 did not specify a formal claim category beyond 'another type of claim'; after discussion the claimant said the only wrongdoing alleged was an alleged threat to cut his hours in January/February 2020. The tribunal struck the claim out as having no reasonable prospect of success and because it was out of time. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- no reasonable prospect of success
- just and equitable to extend time
- balance of probabilities
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.