Race and religion discrimination claims struck out as out of time and lacking merit
A tribunal struck out a former technician's race and religion discrimination claims as out of time and without reasonable prospects. A deposit order was made for a constructive unfair dismissal claim.
1 min read · Last updated 18 May 2026
Case details
Key facts
- The claimant's last day of work was 11 March 2022.
- The claimant commenced ACAS Early Conciliation on 13 June 2022.
- The last act of discrimination relied upon against the second respondent was between 15 February and 14 March 2022.
- The claimant did not attend the hearing and provided no evidence to justify an extension of time.
- The tribunal found no basis to link the allegations to race or religion.
Timeline
-
Wage deduction
The first respondent deducted £900 from the claimant's salary.
-
Prevented from returning to work
The claimant was prevented from returning to work until 3 December 2021 due to a COVID-19 test and surgery.
-
Allegations of negligence
The claimant was accused of negligence on two occasions and subjected to a disciplinary process.
-
Disciplinary meeting
A disciplinary meeting was held regarding the negligence allegations.
-
Appeal outcome
The claimant's appeal against the final written warning was rejected.
-
Last day of work
The claimant's last day of work was 11 March 2022.
-
Holiday booked
The claimant had booked 14 March 2022 off as holiday.
-
ACAS Early Conciliation started
The claimant commenced ACAS Early Conciliation.
-
Preliminary hearing
The tribunal heard the respondents' application to strike out the claims.
-
Judgment issued
The tribunal struck out the discrimination claims and ordered a deposit for the constructive unfair dismissal claim.
The legal issue
The tribunal had to decide whether the claimant's race and religion or belief discrimination claims were brought within the legal time limit and whether they had any reasonable chance of success. It also considered whether the constructive unfair dismissal claim should be subject to a deposit order.
The outcome
The tribunal struck out the claimant's claims of direct race discrimination against both respondents and direct religion or belief discrimination against the first respondent. The claims were out of time because the last alleged act of discrimination occurred between 15 February and 14 March 2022, and ACAS Early Conciliation was not started until 13 June 2022 – well beyond the three-month deadline. The tribunal also found that even if the claims had been in time, they had no reasonable prospect of success because there was no evidence to suggest any of the employer's actions were linked to the claimant's race or religion. The constructive unfair dismissal claim was allowed to proceed but only if the claimant paid a deposit of £500 as a condition of continuing, because the tribunal considered it had little reasonable prospect of success.
- No compensation awarded as the claims were struck out.
- A deposit order of £500 was made for the constructive unfair dismissal claim.
Lessons & takeaways
- Act quickly: discrimination claims must be brought within three months of the last act of discrimination, including ACAS Early Conciliation time limits.
- Link the treatment to a protected characteristic: to succeed in a discrimination claim, you must show evidence that the treatment was because of race, religion, or another protected characteristic.
- Attend hearings: failing to attend a preliminary hearing can result in your claims being struck out, especially if you have no good reason for absence.
- Consider the strength of your case early: if a tribunal thinks your claim has little prospect of success, it may order a deposit before you can proceed.
This case shows the importance of acting promptly when bringing discrimination claims. The former technician alleged that he was watched, disciplined, and treated unfairly because of his race and religion. However, the last alleged act of discrimination occurred in mid-March 2022, and he did not start ACAS Early Conciliation until June 2022 – well over three months later. The tribunal found that there was no continuing act that could extend the time limit, and the claimant did not attend the hearing to explain why time should be extended.
What the employer did right
Gi Group Recruitment Ltd and BMW Park Royal successfully argued that the claims were out of time and had no merit. They pointed out that the claimant's own evidence showed non-discriminatory reasons for each alleged act: the disciplinary process was due to poor performance, the delay in returning to work was due to a COVID-19 self-isolation requirement and surgery, and being watched was a natural consequence of a final written warning. The tribunal agreed that there was no evidence linking any of these actions to race or religion.
Why this matters for similar claims
This case is a reminder that discrimination claims must be brought within strict time limits – usually three months from the last act of discrimination. Even if you have strong feelings about unfair treatment, you need to show how it connects to a protected characteristic like race or religion. If a tribunal considers your claim has little chance of success, it may require a deposit before you can proceed, which can be a financial barrier. Attending hearings is also crucial: the claimant's absence here made it easier for the tribunal to strike out his claims.
Similar cases
Former employee's discrimination claims struck out for being out of time
The tribunal struck out race and disability discrimination claims because they were presented late, and the claimant failed to attend the hearing or provide reasons for the delay.
Former employee's unfair dismissal claim struck out for lack of two years' service
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim against Kings College London was struck out because they did not have the required two years' service. Their discrimination claims were dismissed after a hearing.
Site Manager with 8 months' service loses unfair dismissal claim
A site manager who was dismissed after just eight months had his unfair dismissal claim struck out for lack of qualifying service. His race discrimination claims were allowed to proceed but subject to a £100 deposit order.
Former employee loses unfair dismissal and discrimination claims after failing to pursue them
A former employee's unfair dismissal claim was dismissed for lack of continuity of employment, and his race discrimination claim was thrown out as out of time. Other claims were struck out for failing to actively pursue them.