Case 6002439/2024 · Employment Tribunal

Ms Elisha Neavin v London Borough of Southwark PRELIMINARY HEARING — 2025

Case reference: 6002439/2024
Decision date: 3 September 2025
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Hart Appearances

Indexed: 18 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms Elisha Neavin

Respondent

London Borough of Southwark PRELIMINARY HEARING

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a public preliminary hearing on 3 September 2025, the Tribunal considered whether specified complaints were presented within the applicable time limit. It held that the complaints identified in the judgment were not presented in time and that it was not just and equitable to extend time in the claimant's favour.

The dismissed complaints concerned alleged discrimination arising out of disability and/or victimisation about delay in hearing a stage 2 appeal, refusal to recommend the claimant for a yearly increment, and alleged disability discrimination involving failure to complete a form while the claimant was on sick leave, resulting in underpayment. The claimant's remaining discrimination complaints under case number 6002439/2024 were left listed for a hearing commencing on 1 December 2025.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	Preliminary hearing judgment dismissed as out of time complaints of discrimination arising out of disability concerning delay in hearing a stage 2 appeal, refusal to recommend a yearly increment, and failure to complete a form while the claimant was on sick leave. Remaining discrimination complaints under case number 6002439/2024 were not decided and remained listed for a hearing commencing on 1 December 2025.	Dismissed	Disability	—
Victimisation	The judgment dismissed as out of time the complaints framed as discrimination arising out of disability and/or victimisation concerning delay in hearing the claimant's stage 2 appeal and refusal to recommend the claimant for a yearly increment. Remaining complaints were not decided.	Dismissed	—	—

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 .

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.