Case 3313201/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Mr R Jelti v District Surveyors Association Ltd (trading as LABC) RECORD OF AN OPEN PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2024
- Case reference
- 3313201/2023
- Decision date
- 11 July 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Daniels
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr R Jelti
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was an open preliminary hearing heard at Watford by CVP on 11 July 2024 before Employment Judge Daniels sitting alone. The claimant, Mr R Jelti, appeared in person and the respondent was represented by Mr Ohringer.
The tribunal dismissed the claims for disability discrimination and unlawful victimisation in their entirety. The reason given was that both claims had been presented out of time and, in all the circumstances, it would not be just and equitable to extend the time limits.
Reasons for the judgment were given orally. The written record states that any request for written reasons had to be submitted within 14 days of the date of the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed at an open preliminary hearing because the claim was presented out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time limits. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | Dismissed at an open preliminary hearing because the claim was presented out of time and it was not just and equitable to extend time limits. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable extension of time limits
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.