Case 1402117/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Miss A Shaw v UK Space Agency — 2022
- Case reference
- 1402117/2021
- Decision date
- 16 November 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Gray Appearances
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss A Shaw
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningOn 3 November 2022, Employment Judge Gray sitting by video at Southampton recorded that claim 1402117/2021 had already been found not to be validly presented by Employment Judge Midgley. The second claim, 1402133/2022, was held to have been validly presented on 30 June 2022.
The tribunal held that it was just and equitable to extend time for the complaints relating to the appeal outcome of 11 March 2021 within the second claim, noting the Claimant's position that this was the last act in a series of acts and leaving open whether the allegations amounted to conduct extending over a period. The victimisation complaint the Claimant sought to add by amendment application dated 19 June 2022 was not finally determined; it was to be considered in the context of an amendment application to the claim as now permitted to proceed. No substantive liability or remedy was decided in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim 1402117/2021 had already been held by Employment Judge Midgley not to be a validly presented claim. This judgment records that position and does not determine the merits. | Other | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim 1402133/2022 was held to have been validly presented on 30 June 2022. The tribunal extended time on a just and equitable basis for complaints relating to the appeal outcome dated 11 March 2021, but did not determine the substantive liability of those complaints. | Other | Disability | — |
| Victimisation | The victimisation complaint the Claimant sought to add by amendment application dated 19 June 2022 was left to be considered in the context of an amendment application to the claim as now permitted to proceed. No merits decision was made on the amendment. | Other | — | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- just and equitable extension of time
- conduct extending over a period
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.