Case 3321166/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs J Parish v Contract Personnel — 2022
- Case reference
- 3321166/2021
- Decision date
- 11 December 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge M Warren Representation
- Venue
- Norwich
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs J Parish
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe case was heard at Norwich on 6 December 2022 before Employment Judge M Warren. The judgment records that Mrs J Parish’s claims were brought against Contract Personnel and that the hearing was attended by the claimant in person and by Mr Sutton for the respondent.
Employment Judge M Warren decided that the claimant’s claims were issued out of time. The tribunal further found that it was not just and equitable to extend time, and on that basis the claims were struck out for want of jurisdiction.
The record notes that reasons for the judgment were given orally at the hearing and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time. No compensation or other monetary remedy was awarded in the written judgment.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age discrimination | The gov.uk listing categories identify age discrimination as one of the claims. The judgment itself records only that the claims were issued out of time and struck out for want of jurisdiction; it does not separate the reasoning by claim type. | Struck out | Age | — |
| Sex discrimination | The gov.uk listing categories identify sex discrimination as one of the claims. The judgment itself records only that the claims were issued out of time and struck out for want of jurisdiction; it does not separate the reasoning by claim type. | Struck out | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- just and equitable to extend 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.
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.