Case 1301954/2017 · Employment Tribunal
Ms H. Vamadeva - Counsel For the v Birmingham City Council — 2020
- Case reference
- 1301954/2017
- Decision date
- 10 March 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Algazy QC
- Panel members
- Mrs B.E. Hicks, Mr T.C. Liburd
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms H. Vamadeva - Counsel For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal unanimously held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the Equality Act claim. It found that it was not just and equitable to extend time for bringing the claim under s.123 Equality Act 2010.
The tribunal also stated that, if it were determined that it did have jurisdiction, the claim would in any event be dismissed on its merits in the alternative. Oral reasons were given, with written reasons to be produced only if requested under Rule 62(3).
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination | The judgment refers to a claim under the Equality Act 2010 and the gov.uk listing category identifies disability discrimination. The tribunal held it had no jurisdiction because time should not be extended under s.123 Equality Act 2010; it also dismissed the claim on the merits in the alternative. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.123 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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.