Case 3321109/2021 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Ms Radley, Director — 2023
- Case reference
- 3321109/2021
- Decision date
- 5 January 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt an open preliminary hearing on 20 October 2022, Employment Judge K J Palmer sat alone and heard the claimant in person for Mr L Marangozov and Ms Radley, Director, for Harper and Guy Consulting Limited. The tribunal dealt only with time-limit and withdrawal issues; no merits findings or monetary award were made.
The claimant's unlawful deduction of wages claims were found to be out of time. The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable for those claims to have been presented in time, and they were therefore dismissed.
The race discrimination claim was also found to have been presented out of time. The tribunal held that it was not just and equitable to extend time to validate that claim, so it was dismissed.
The age discrimination claim was withdrawn by the claimant and was dismissed on withdrawal.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim found out of time; tribunal held it was reasonably practicable for the claim to have been presented in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Claim found out of time; tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend time to validate the claim. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | The claimant withdrew this claim, and it was dismissed on withdrawal. | Withdrawn | Age | — |
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.