Kester Charles Bey (1) Rickardo Nelson (2) v Tesco Stores Ltd — 2024

The tribunal refused Mr Bey's adjournment request because there was no medical evidence to support it and no apparent reason why representation had not been arranged earlier. Mr Bey's unfair dismissal claim had already been rejected for failure to provide employment dates; the judge stated that, even if it had not been rejected, it would have been struck out because Acas early conciliation was started after the primary limitation period and the further delay was not reasonable.

The tribunal explored Mr Bey's discrimination complaints and found no arguable case. The disability discrimination claim had no reasonable prospect of success because there was inadequate evidence that mild dyslexia amounted to a disability and no arguable discriminatory treatment related to it. The race and religion or belief discrimination claims had no reasonable prospect of success because Mr Bey could not connect the training and competence issues to those protected characteristics, and the tribunal also found them out of time with no basis to extend time. The referred-to harassment allegation lacked dates and names, was not pleaded, was out of time, and had no reasonable prospect of being added.

Mr Nelson had not actively participated in his case and did not remain available to explain it at the hearing. The tribunal found his claim form incomprehensible as a tribunal claim, with no material link between the matters mentioned and his dismissal, and no particulars supporting age or race discrimination. His claims were struck out as not being actively pursued and as having no reasonable prospect of success.