Case 1301328/2019 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Respondent — 2020
- Case reference
- 1301328/2019
- Decision date
- 16 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Perry Members
- Panel members
- Miss SP Outwin, Mr TC Liburd
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningIn Ms E Penfold v Our Place Schools Limited, heard at Centre City Tower, Birmingham on 11-13 March 2020, the tribunal gave a unanimous judgment dismissing the claims. On the dismissal complaint, the tribunal found that the claimant was not entitled to treat herself as dismissed. It also found, in the alternative, that the reason or principal reason for any dismissal was not one falling within s.99 or s.100 Employment Rights Act 1996.
The tribunal also dismissed the pregnancy/maternity discrimination complaint. It found that there was no contravention of part 5 of the Equality Act 2010 and no discrimination under s.18 Equality Act 2010. The decision records that the claimant's other complaint(s) were outside the tribunal's jurisdiction and were therefore dismissed as well. No monetary award was made.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The tribunal found the claimant was not entitled to treat herself as dismissed. In the alternative, the reason or principal reason for any dismissal was not one that fell within s.99 or s.100 Employment Rights Act 1996. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | The tribunal found there was no contravention of part 5 of the Equality Act 2010 and no pregnancy/maternity discrimination under s.18 Equality Act 2010. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
| Other | The tribunal held it did not have jurisdiction to hear the claimant's other complaint(s). | Dismissed | — | — |
Legal tests applied
3 references- s.99 or s.100 Employment Rights Act 1996
- part 5 Equality Act 2010
- s.18 Equality Act 2010
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.