Case 4121537/2018 · Employment Tribunal

Mr W MacLeod v Represented by: Mr M Allison - Solicitor ARK Housing Association — 2019

Case reference: 4121537/2018
Decision date: 22 October 2019
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge R Gall
Venue: Glasgow

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mr W MacLeod

Respondent

Represented by: Mr M Allison - Solicitor ARK Housing Association

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

This was a preliminary hearing in Glasgow on 14 and 16 October 2019. The tribunal considered whether the claimant, Mr W MacLeod, could pursue an out-of-time unfair dismissal claim and an out-of-time disability discrimination claim. The respondents accepted that he had the protected characteristic of disability at the time of dismissal, although they did not accept that they knew or ought to have known of it. The tribunal therefore focused on limitation and time extension issues rather than the substantive merits of dismissal or discrimination.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	Preliminary issue only: the tribunal extended time under section 111(2)(b) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, holding that it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time and that it was presented within a reasonable time after expiry. The merits of the unfair dismissal claim were not determined in this judgment.	Other	—	—
Disability discrimination	Preliminary issue only: the tribunal extended time under section 123(1)(b) of the Equality Act 2010 because it was just and equitable to do so. The respondents accepted that the claimant had the protected characteristic of disability at the time of dismissal, though they maintained they did not know and had no reasonable basis to know that at the time. The merits of the discrimination claim were not determined in this judgment.	Other	Disability	—

Legal tests applied

4 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.