Case 3307513/2023 · Employment Tribunal

In person For the v Respondent — 2024

Case reference: 3307513/2023
Decision date: 6 March 2024
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge George Appearances
Venue: Reading

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

1 named

Claimant

In person For the

Respondent

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a preliminary hearing in public, the tribunal decided that the claimant was disabled within the meaning of s.6 Equality Act 2010 from 28 December 2022 by reason of depression and anxiety.

The tribunal also decided that the claimant's complaint of direct race discrimination had not been presented within the time limit specified in s.123 Equality Act 2010. It found that it was not just and equitable to extend time, so that complaint was dismissed. The claimant's other complaints were to proceed to a hearing.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	The tribunal determined at a preliminary hearing that the claimant was disabled within the meaning of s.6 Equality Act 2010 from 28 December 2022 by reason of depression and anxiety. The substantive complaints were to proceed to a hearing.	Other	Disability	—
Race discrimination	The complaint of direct race discrimination was dismissed because it was not presented within the time limit in s.123 Equality Act 2010 and the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend time.	Dismissed	Race	—

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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.