Case 1403729/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Pranczk For the v Ms Weatherly, In House Solicitor — 2020
- Case reference
- 1403729/2018
- Decision date
- 30 April 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Pranczk For the
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt a preliminary hearing held by video on 30 September 2021, Employment Judge A Richardson held that the claims in case 1403729/2018 were subject to the rule in Henderson v Henderson and, in the alternative, were out of time. The tribunal said it had no jurisdiction to hear the claims and dismissed them. The judgment was sent to the parties on 9 November 2021 and records the claimant as appearing in person and the respondent as represented by an in-house solicitor.
The schedule to the judgment records separate rulings on amendment incidents. An amendment referring to indirect discrimination under s.19 EqA 2010 was not allowed, and an amendment under s.13 EqA 2010 was also not allowed. Several proposed s.26 EqA 2010 amendments were considered in relation to incidents involving L Hampton, the Porter, and D McNair; some were allowed and some were not, including rulings that amendments were allowed in respect of race but not disability where that issue arose. Those rulings were procedural and do not change the overall dismissal of the claims for lack of jurisdiction.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the tribunal held the claims were subject to Henderson v Henderson and, alternatively, out of time; no jurisdiction was found. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the tribunal held the claims were subject to Henderson v Henderson and, alternatively, out of time; no jurisdiction was found. | Dismissed | Disability | — |
| Race discrimination | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the tribunal held the claims were subject to Henderson v Henderson and, alternatively, out of time; no jurisdiction was found. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Unfair dismissal | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the tribunal held the claims were subject to Henderson v Henderson and, alternatively, out of time; no jurisdiction was found. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the tribunal held the claims were subject to Henderson v Henderson and, alternatively, out of time; no jurisdiction was found. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Working time regulations | Dismissed at preliminary hearing because the tribunal held the claims were subject to Henderson v Henderson and, alternatively, out of time; no jurisdiction was found. |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Henderson v Henderson
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.
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.