Case 1403872/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Mrs J Bassett v 1 The Cranfield Trust 2 Ms A Tincknell — 2021

Case reference: 1403872/2019
Decision date: 15 June 2021
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Reed Representation
Venue: Bristol By CVP

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Mrs J Bassett

Respondent

1 The Cranfield Trust 2 Ms A Tincknell

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a preliminary hearing on 1 and 2 June 2021, Employment Judge Reed found that Mrs J Bassett was disabled by reason of Carpel Tunnel Syndrome from 2008 and by reason of depression from 27 November 2018. The judgment also recorded that she was entitled to take forward a claim under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 without amending her claim.

The tribunal dismissed the claim for unauthorised deductions from wages because it had been presented out of time and it was reasonably practicable for it to have been presented in time. It also dismissed the duplicate third claim, case 1401756/2020, after accepting the second claim, and dismissed the second respondent from the proceedings.

The claimant's whistleblowing detriment claims in the second claim were dismissed as an abuse of process. By consent, her claims for a redundancy payment and holiday pay were dismissed. No monetary award was made in this judgment.

Claims and outcomes

7 findings recorded

This case has mixed outcomes under at least one legal claim type. A tribunal can uphold some allegations and dismiss others under the same legal head, so rows below may represent separate issues or allegation groups from the judgment.

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Disability discrimination	Preliminary issue only: the tribunal found the claimant was disabled by reason of Carpel Tunnel Syndrome from 2008 and by reason of depression from 27 November 2018. No discrimination liability was determined in this judgment.	Other	Disability	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	The claim for unauthorised deductions from wages was presented out of time. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for it to have been presented in time and dismissed it.	Dismissed	—	—
Other	The claimant's duplicate third claim, case 1401756/2020, was dismissed after the Tribunal accepted the second claim. The second respondent was dismissed from the proceedings.	Dismissed	—	—
Other	The tribunal held that the claimant was entitled to take forward a claim under section 38 of the Employment Act 2002 without amending her claim.	Other	—	—
Whistleblowing	The claimant's whistleblowing detriment claims in her second claim were dismissed on the ground that they were an abuse of process.	Dismissed	—	—
Redundancy

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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 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.