Case 6020708/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr H Pirinc Respondent Mr M Hatipoglu Heard at London South (by CVP) v Mr M Hatipoglu — 2024
- Case reference
- 6020708/2024
- Decision date
- 8 October 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mr
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr H Pirinc Respondent Mr M Hatipoglu Heard at London South (by CVP)
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Claimant brought claims for unfair dismissal, arrear wages and sex discrimination described as harassment during employment. The Tribunal recorded that the claimed employment ended on 16 February 2024, ACAS Early Conciliation was not started until 8 October 2024, and the claim was presented on 13 December 2024, nearly seven months late.
The Tribunal considered the Claimant's explanations for delay, including physical injury, psychological trauma, bereavement, alleged threats, advice from Bromley Well and the ACAS process. It found that the Claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable to bring the unfair dismissal and wages claims in time, or that they were brought within a reasonable time thereafter.
For the sex harassment claim, the Tribunal found that the Claimant had not shown that it would be just and equitable to extend time. The claims were therefore outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction, had no reasonable prospect of success and were struck out.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The claim was struck out as brought out of time and outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment refers to arrear wages and wages claims, which were struck out as brought out of time and outside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. | Struck out | — | — |
| Harassment | The judgment describes the claim as sex discrimination, specifically harassment during employment, and struck it out as brought out of time. | Struck out | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- Section 111 Employment Rights Act 1996
- Section 207B Employment Rights Act 1996
- Section 123 Equality Act 2010
- not reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre 2003 IRLR 434
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.