Case 3312620/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Henry, Counsel For v Ms. Wroe, Solicitor — 2023
- Case reference
- 3312620/2022
- Decision date
- 16 October 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Douse
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Henry, Counsel For
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt this preliminary hearing, Employment Judge Douse found that the claimant’s claim form had been presented out of time. On the unfair dismissal complaint, the tribunal held that it had been reasonably practicable for that complaint to be presented in time, and the claim was therefore dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The tribunal also considered the disability discrimination complaints. It held that it was just and equitable to extend time for presentation of those complaints, and extended time to 14 October 2022. The written record does not contain any determination of the merits of the disability discrimination allegations, only the limitation ruling.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for the unfair dismissal complaint to have been presented in time and dismissed that claim for lack of jurisdiction. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The tribunal extended time for presentation of the disability discrimination complaints on a just and equitable basis to 14 October 2022. The judgment does not determine the merits of those complaints. | 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.