Case 1310164/2020 · Employment Tribunal
Ms L Harrison v Ministry of Justice — 2021
- Case reference
- 1310164/2020
- Decision date
- 10 September 2021
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brewer Representation
- Venue
- Midlands East via Cloud Video Platform
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms L Harrison
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal considered claims brought by Ms L Harrison against the Ministry of Justice. The claims identified in the judgment were unauthorised deductions from wages, discrimination arising from disability, indirect disability discrimination, and failure to make reasonable adjustments.
The Tribunal held that each of those claims had been presented out of time. It found that it did not have jurisdiction to hear them and dismissed each claim on that basis. No remedy was awarded in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
4 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The judgment states the unauthorised deductions from wages claim was presented out of time and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Discrimination arising from disability was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Indirect disability discrimination was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Disability discrimination | Failure to make reasonable adjustments was dismissed because it was presented out of time and the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to hear it. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
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.