Case 3311497/2024 · Employment Tribunal
J Eisen (lay representative) For the v M Haworth (solicitor) — 2025
- Case reference
- 3311497/2024
- Decision date
- 8 December 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge W Anderson Appearances
- Venue
- Watford
Parties
2 namedClaimant
J Eisen (lay representative) For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal decided that the complaints of unfair dismissal, whistleblowing and unpaid wages were not presented within the applicable time limit. It found that it was reasonably practicable to present those complaints in time, and dismissed them.
The tribunal also decided that the complaints of race and disability discrimination were not presented within the applicable time limit. It found that it was just and equitable to extend time for those complaints, so they will proceed.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed because the complaint was not presented within the applicable time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | Dismissed because the complaint was not presented within the applicable time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment describes this as unpaid wages. It was dismissed because the complaint was not presented within the applicable time limit and it was reasonably practicable to do so. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | The complaint was not presented within the applicable time limit, but the tribunal found it just and equitable to extend time. The complaint will proceed; its merits were not determined in this judgment. | Other | Race | — |
| Disability discrimination | The complaint was not presented within the applicable time limit, but the tribunal found it just and equitable to extend time. The complaint will proceed; its merits were not determined in this judgment. | Other | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.