Case 1304123/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Ms A. Gordon 1st v Karen Fyffe 2nd Respondent: Sumaiyah Siddiq 3rd Respondent: Birmingham City Council — 2024
- Case reference
- 1304123/2023
- Decision date
- 11 March 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Murdin. Representation
- Venue
- Midlands West
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms A. Gordon 1st
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThis was a preliminary judgment dealing with the Claimant's application to amend and the Respondents' applications to strike out the claim or, alternatively, for a deposit order. The Tribunal recorded that the only claims now being pursued were failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment, both on the basis that the effects of menopause amounted to a disability.
The Tribunal granted the amendment application, including in relation to the failure to provide a reference and allegations that the Respondents were dismissive of menopause symptoms and labelled them as mental-health issues. It treated the religion and/or belief discrimination claim as no longer pursued and recorded that the unfair dismissal claim had already been dismissed for insufficient length of service.
The Tribunal dismissed the strike-out application and the application for a deposit order. It held that the discrimination claims turned on evidence and factual disputes that could only fairly be resolved after evidence at a final hearing, and it listed the matter for a further case management hearing.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The judgment records that the unfair dismissal claim had been dismissed for want of the necessary length of service. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | The live claim is failure to make reasonable adjustments under sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010, based on the alleged effects of menopause amounting to a disability. This preliminary judgment granted amendment and dismissed strike-out/deposit applications; it did not determine the merits. | Other | Disability | — |
| Harassment | The live harassment claim is under section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 and is based on the alleged effects of menopause amounting to a disability. This preliminary judgment granted amendment and dismissed strike-out/deposit applications; it did not determine the merits. | Other | Disability | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | The judgment records that the Claimant had decided no longer to pursue a claim for discrimination arising from religion and/or belief. | Withdrawn | Religion or belief | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- Selkent Bus Company v Moore [1996] ICR 836
- Vaughan v Modality Partnership [2020] UKEAT 0417 20 BA(V)
- Rule 37 of the Employment Tribunal Regulations 2013
- Rule 39 of the Employment Tribunal Regulations 2013
- sections 20 and 21 of the Equality Act 2010
- section 26 of the 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.