Case 1306830/2020 · Employment Tribunal
In person For the v Mr S Willey, Solicitor — 2021
- Case reference
- 1306830/2020
- Decision date
- 4 February 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cookson. The
Parties
2 namedClaimant
In person For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal recorded that the respondent agreed to pay the claimant 21 hours of accrued but untaken TOIL in relation to the unauthorised deductions from wages claim. On the itemised pay statement issue, the tribunal declared that the claimant was entitled to an April 2020 statement and recorded that it had been provided, with no pay due in respect of that matter.
The claimant's discrimination case was put as indirect sex discrimination arising from the circumstances of his dismissal after an allegation of rape. Taking the claimant's case at its highest, the tribunal held that the PCP he advanced could not support an indirect discrimination claim because it was not neutral and would not apply to women. The claimant confirmed more than once that he was not bringing a direct sex discrimination claim, and the indirect sex discrimination claim was struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | The claimant expressly pursued indirect, not direct, sex discrimination. The tribunal struck out the indirect sex discrimination claim as having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Sex | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The respondent agreed to pay 21 hours of accrued but untaken TOIL within 21 days. The judgment does not state a monetary value for those hours. | Settled | — | — |
| Other | The tribunal declared that the claimant was entitled to an itemised pay statement for April 2020 and recorded that it had been provided. No pay was due for this matter. | Upheld | — | — |
Legal tests applied
7 references- s.19(2) EqA
- Dziedziak v Future Electronics Ltd EAT 0271/11
- Taiwo v Olaigbe and anor EAT 0254/12
- Rule 37 Striking Out
- Rule 39 Deposit orders
- Anyanwu v South Bank Student Union and another
- Ezsias v North Glamorgan NHS Trust
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.
- Open official judgment 1 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 2 PDF on gov.uk
- Open official judgment 3 PDF on gov.uk
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.