Case 3320808/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mr C Stone Respondent Oxfordshire GM Limited PRELIMINARY HEARING BY CVP v Respondent — 2022
- Case reference
- 3320808/2021
- Decision date
- 2 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto Appearances
- Venue
- Reading
Parties
1 namedClaimant
Mr C Stone Respondent Oxfordshire GM Limited PRELIMINARY HEARING BY CVP
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Reading on 11 August 2022 before Employment Judge Gumbiti-Zimuto sitting alone, the tribunal amended the respondent's name to Oxfordshire GM Limited and considered strike-out applications relating to the claimant's Equality Act complaints. The claimant said he was disabled and referred to a left-knee injury, but he did not comply with the Tribunal's order for information about his alleged disability. The tribunal held that the non-compliance was significant, that a fair hearing would not be possible, and struck out the disability discrimination complaints.
The claimant also brought complaints described as harassment, including matters he had characterised as assault, sexual harassment and GDPR issues. When asked what protected characteristic he relied on, he gave different answers, including age, sex, sexual orientation and sexuality. The tribunal held that the complaints were out of time, that there was no adequate basis for extending time on a just and equitable basis, and that the conduct complained of was not obviously linked to a protected characteristic. Those harassment complaints were therefore struck out.
The tribunal also dismissed the claims against Deanne Rodney, Sam Rodney and 'Victor Known as Vic'. The judgment records that unfair dismissal could only be pursued against the employer, and that the unfair dismissal claim itself was to proceed to a full hearing. No remedy was determined at this preliminary hearing.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | Struck out for failure to comply with the Tribunal's order requiring information about the alleged disability. The claimant had referred to a left-knee injury but did not clearly provide the information sought, and the Tribunal was not satisfied the material showed disability even if taken at face value. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Harassment | Harassment complaints were struck out as out of time and because the Tribunal was not satisfied it was just and equitable to extend time. The claimant varied between age, sex, sexual orientation and sexuality as the basis of the complaint, but the Tribunal found no clear protected characteristic and no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | Claims against Deanne Rodney, Sam Rodney and 'Victor Known as Vic' were dismissed. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
4 references- Rule 37(1)(c) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- Rule 37(1)(d) Employment Tribunals Rules of Procedure 2013
- no reasonable prospect of success
- just and equitable extension of time
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.