Case 6002058/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr K. Winkworth v Control Automotive Risk Consulting Group Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 6002058/2024
- Decision date
- 23 May 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge G. King Representation
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr K. Winkworth
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMr K. Winkworth brought claims of harassment and disability discrimination against Control Automotive Risk Consulting Group Limited. The case was heard on 10 April 2025 before Employment Judge G. King, with the claimant appearing in person and the respondent represented by Ms C. Lauret.
The tribunal held that both claims were presented out of time. It found that it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit, and on that basis concluded that it had no jurisdiction to hear either claim.
Both claims were therefore dismissed. The written record notes that reasons were given orally at the hearing and that no separate written reasons would be provided unless requested.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | Presented out of time; the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit and therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Presented out of time; the tribunal found it was not just and equitable to extend the time limit and therefore had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- 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.
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.