Case 1307317/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms M Nicholls First v Darwin Group Limited Second Respondent: Mr Charles Pierce — 2021
- Case reference
- 1307317/2020
- Decision date
- 18 June 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Mark Butler
- Venue
- Birmingham
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms M Nicholls First
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a record of an open preliminary hearing heard at Birmingham Employment Tribunal by CVP on 15 June 2021, Employment Judge Mark Butler sitting alone considered whether the claimant's Equality Act claims had been brought out of time. The tribunal held that although the claims were outside the primary time limit in s.123 of the Equality Act 2010, it was just and equitable to extend time in the circumstances.
The effect of that ruling was to give the tribunal jurisdiction to hear the claims, and the case was directed to proceed to a final hearing. This judgment did not determine liability on the underlying discrimination allegations and recorded no remedy.
Claims and outcomes
1 finding recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination | Preliminary hearing only. The tribunal held that the claims were presented outside the primary time limit in s.123 Equality Act 2010 but that it was just and equitable to extend time so the tribunal had jurisdiction to hear them. No substantive merits findings were made in this record. | Upheld | Sex | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s.123 Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable extension of time
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 The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.