Case 3311116/2024 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v R Page (solicitor) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3311116/2024
- Decision date
- 29 July 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge W Anderson Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal dismissed the claimant's unfair dismissal claim because it was not filed in time. It found that the claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim within the statutory time limit under s111(2)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996, and accordingly held that it had no jurisdiction to hear that claim.
The tribunal also dealt with the claimant's direct race discrimination claim at a limitation stage. It found that the claim had not been presented in time, but it was just and equitable to extend time for filing until 20 September 2024 under s123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010.
In the same judgment, the tribunal found that the two complained-of acts on 22 February 2024 and 5 April 2024 formed a continuing act for the purposes of s123(3)(a) Equality Act 2010. The extracted judgment records these limitation rulings and does not determine the merits of the discrimination allegation.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Presented out of time; the claimant did not show that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time under s111(2)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996, so the tribunal held it had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The direct race discrimination claim was found to be out of time, but time was extended to 20 September 2024 under s123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010. The tribunal also found that the acts complained of on 22 February 2024 and 5 April 2024 formed a continuing act under s123(3)(a) Equality Act 2010. The extracted judgment does not determine the merits of the discrimination claim. | Other | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s111(2)(b) Employment Rights Act 1996
- not reasonably practicable
- s123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable
- s123(3)(a) Equality Act 2010
- continuing act
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.