Dr Gueorgui Kolev v Middlesex University

Dr Gueorgui Kolev v Middlesex University

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by determining substantive preliminary issues (limitation and extension of time) at a hearing listed for strike-out and/or deposit order without proper notice, case management, or identification of issues, and by failing to properly consider the claimant's pleaded case and the applicable legal principles. The Tribunal conflated strike-out and preliminary issue determination, failed to take the claimant's case at its highest, and did not follow the required procedural safeguards, rendering the judgment flawed.

Parties
Appellant: Dr Gueorgui Kolev; Respondent: Middlesex University
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Preliminary Hearing
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment set aside; case remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Sex Discrimination, Harassment, Victimisation, Strike Out Applications, Limitation Periods, Preliminary Hearings, Case Management
Employment Law Discrimination Law Sex Discrimination Harassment Victimisation Strike Out Applications Limitation Periods Preliminary Hearings +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Gueorgui Kolev

Appellant

Middlesex University

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal From Employment Tribunal Preliminary Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Employment Tribunal erred in its approach to determining if the claimant's complaints under the Equality Act 2010 extended over a period of time within section 123 EqA 2010
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in its approach to considering if it was just and equitable to extend time under section 123(1)(b) EqA 2010
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal properly identified the claimant's case and issues

Ratio Decidendi

The Employment Tribunal erred in law by determining substantive preliminary issues (limitation and extension of time) at a hearing listed for strike-out and/or deposit order without proper notice, case management, or identification of issues, and by failing to properly consider the claimant's pleaded case and the applicable legal principles. The Tribunal conflated strike-out and preliminary issue determination, failed to take the claimant's case at its highest, and did not follow the required procedural safeguards, rendering the judgment flawed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment set aside; case remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal for reconsideration.

Orders

  • The case is remitted to a differently constituted Tribunal for reconsideration of the strike-out application and/or limitation issues.
  • A directions hearing is suggested to clarify the claimant's claims and the involvement of relevant individuals.