Case 4101742/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr M R Kler v Barclays Bank UK plc — 2020
- Case reference
- 4101742/2019
- Decision date
- 3 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Holmes REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr M R Kler
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe claimant brought claims of race, age and religion or belief discrimination arising from the withdrawal of a potential employment opportunity with the respondent. The Tribunal found that the claimant knew by 17 October 2018 that he had been rejected, so the deadline for presenting the claim or starting ACAS early conciliation was 16 January 2019. He did not start early conciliation until 5 February 2019 and presented the claim on 26 February 2019.
The Tribunal considered whether it was just and equitable to extend time. It found that the delay was significant and that the claimant's explanations were inconsistent, vague on dates, and did not adequately explain why he had not taken steps within time. The Tribunal accepted that the additional delay was unlikely to affect the cogency of the respondent's evidence, but held that the absence of prejudice to the respondent was not enough.
The Tribunal declined to extend time and dismissed the discrimination claims. It did not need to determine the respondent's strike out or deposit order applications, but stated briefly that it would have been persuaded that the claims had little reasonable prospects of success and that deposit orders would have been made had the claims proceeded.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the claim was presented out of time and the Tribunal declined to extend time on just and equitable grounds. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the claim was presented out of time and the Tribunal declined to extend time on just and equitable grounds. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the claim was presented out of time and the Tribunal declined to extend time on just and equitable grounds. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- British Coal Corporation v Keeble
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre t/a Leisure Link
- Chohan v Derby Law Centre
- s.33 Limitation Act 1980
- London Borough of Southwark v Afolabi
- Madarassy v Nomura International Ltd
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.