Case 6002879/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mr Paul Evans v The Secretary of State for Justice — 2026
- Case reference
- 6002879/2025
- Decision date
- 20 July 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Fowell Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr Paul Evans
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Fowell struck out three of Mr Evans's five complaints of harassment related to race. Those complaints concerned alleged incidents in 1997 or 1998, 2013 and 2015. Under section 123 of the Equality Act 2010, the relevant date for the normal time limit was 19 August 2024. Earlier acts could proceed if they formed conduct extending over a period ending after that date, or if it was just and equitable to extend time.
For the Rule 38 application, the tribunal took the alleged facts at their highest and applied the caution set out in Anyanwu, Balls and Cox before striking out a discrimination claim. The alleged harassers were not identified for the first three incidents, the tribunal found it very hard to see what could connect them over such a long period, and there was no explanation for the failure to bring a claim at the time. It found those complaints hopelessly out of time and held that they had no reasonable prospects of success.
The tribunal did not strike out the two complaints from 2022. Both involved a senior manager named Mandy, who was available to give evidence, and the tribunal found it arguable that time might be extended on just and equitable grounds. It made no finding on whether those allegations were true. The wider constructive dismissal and disability discrimination claims mentioned as context were not decided in this judgment.
The respondent's application for a deposit order was refused because it could not be dealt with on the papers. No monetary remedy was recorded.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | Three complaints concerning alleged incidents in 1997 or 1998, 2013 and 2015 were struck out on time-limit grounds as having no reasonable prospects of success. Two complaints from 2022 were not struck out, and their merits were not decided. | Struck out | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- conduct extending over a period
- just and equitable extension of time
- Rule 38(1)(a) Employment Tribunal Rules of Procedure 2024: no reasonable prospect of success
- Anyanwu and anor v South Bank Student Union and anor [2001] ICR 391
- Balls v Downham Market High School and College [2011] IRLR 217
- Cox v Adecco [2021] ICR 1307
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.