Case 6003489/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Fernley v Equans Regeneration Limited and 1 other — 2025
- Case reference
- 6003489/2025
- Decision date
- 19 August 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Dunlop Representation
- Venue
- Manchester
Parties
3 namedClaimant
Ms M Fernley
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing in Manchester on 16 July 2025, Employment Judge Dunlop held that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to hear Ms M Fernley's complaints because they were all brought outside the relevant limitation periods. The written judgment states that the claim was against Equans Regeneration Limited and Bouygues (UK) Limited and that the hearing was conducted by CVP.
In relation to the Employment Rights Act 1996 complaints, the tribunal found that the claimant had not shown it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time, so the time limit was not extended. In relation to the Equality Act 2010 complaint, the tribunal found that the claimant had not shown the claim was brought within such further period as was just and equitable, so the time limit was not extended.
The tribunal therefore dismissed the claim. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The written judgment groups the Employment Rights Act 1996 complaints together and holds that they were presented outside the relevant limitation period; time was not extended because the claimant had not shown it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Whistleblowing | The written judgment groups the Employment Rights Act 1996 complaints together and holds that they were presented outside the relevant limitation period; time was not extended because the claimant had not shown it was not reasonably practicable to present the claim in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The Equality Act 2010 complaint was held to be out of time and the tribunal found the claimant had not shown that it would be just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- not reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.