Case 3306506/2021 · Employment Tribunal

In person For the v Mr G Lomas, representative — 2022

Case reference: 3306506/2021
Decision date: 1 September 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Hyams

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

In person For the

Respondent

Mr G Lomas, representative

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

Employment Judge Hyams, sitting alone at Watford on 15 August 2022, held that the claimant's unpaid wages claim and his section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 dismissal claim were outside the tribunal's jurisdiction because they were presented after the three-month primary time limit. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present those claims within time and that the time limit was not extended by any applicable period of early conciliation.

The claimant's age and disability discrimination claims were also held to be outside jurisdiction because they were made outside the primary time limit. The tribunal found that it was not just and equitable to extend time under section 123(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010. All claims were therefore dismissed on limitation and jurisdiction grounds, and no remedy was awarded.

Claims and outcomes

4 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unlawful deduction from wages	Held outside the tribunal's jurisdiction because the claim was presented outside the three-month primary time limit; the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it within that time and the limit was not extended by any applicable period of early conciliation.	Dismissed	—	—
Whistleblowing	The judgment refers to a dismissal claim within section 103A of the Employment Rights Act 1996; it was held outside jurisdiction because it was presented outside the three-month primary time limit and the tribunal found it was reasonably practicable to present it in time.	Dismissed	—	—
Age discrimination	Held outside the tribunal's jurisdiction because it was presented outside the primary time limit and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time under section 123(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010.	Dismissed	Age	—
Disability discrimination	Held outside the tribunal's jurisdiction because it was presented outside the primary time limit and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time under section 123(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010.	Dismissed	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

5 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.