Case 8000770/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Mr P Mason v GB Land Engineering Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 8000770/2024
- Decision date
- 3 June 2024
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judge
- Employment Judge Sangster
- Venue
- Edinburgh
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr P Mason
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing on limitation, Mr P Mason brought complaints of direct religious discrimination, indirect religious discrimination and victimisation against GB Land Engineering Limited. The tribunal did not reach the merits. It held that, even if the alleged conduct was treated as one continuing act, the last relevant act was 15 December 2023 and the three-month time limit expired on 14 March 2024, so the claim presented on 3 June 2024 was 82 days late.
The tribunal then considered whether time should be extended on a just and equitable basis under s.123 EqA 2010. It accepted that Mr Mason had experienced pain and periods of low mood during the relevant period, but found no medical evidence that those matters prevented him from bringing a claim. It noted that he did not consult his GP about mental health, was only prescribed pain medication for a short period, and was nevertheless able to engage with Citizens Advice, Acas and the universal credit system during the same period.
The tribunal also rejected ignorance of time limits as a reasonable explanation for the delay. It found that Mr Mason knew of Acas, had contact with Citizens Advice, accessed the Acas website and could have made enquiries about the time limit. Taking the length and reasons for delay, the claimant's earlier suspicion that he had a claim, and prejudice to the respondent into account, the tribunal held that there was no satisfactory basis to extend time and therefore no jurisdiction to consider the EqA complaints.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Religion or belief discrimination | Direct religious discrimination complaint; the tribunal held it was out of time and had no jurisdiction to consider it. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Indirect religious discrimination complaint; the tribunal held it was out of time and had no jurisdiction to consider it. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Victimisation | Victimisation complaint; the tribunal held it was out of time and had no jurisdiction to consider it. | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- s.123 EqA 2010
- Robertson v Bexley Community Centre
- British Coal Corporation v Keeble
- London Borough of Southwark v Afolabi
- Abertawe Bro Morgannwg University Local Health Board v Morgan
- Adedeji v University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust
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.