Case 1406412/2019 · Employment Tribunal

Miss I Curtis-Dicks v St Mungos Community Housing Association Ltd — 2020

Case reference: 1406412/2019
Decision date: 24 June 2020
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge Livesey Representation

Indexed: 21 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Miss I Curtis-Dicks

Respondent

St Mungos Community Housing Association Ltd

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At this preliminary hearing on 23 November 2020, Employment Judge Livesey determined that Miss I Curtis-Dicks was not an employee of St Mungos Community Housing Association within the meaning of s.230 Employment Rights Act 1996 or s.83 Equality Act 2010, but was a worker within the meaning of the Working Time Regulations 1998. The judgment records that the claims were brought out of time.

The tribunal held that it was reasonably practicable for the claims to have been brought in time under s.111 Employment Rights Act 1996 and regulation 30 of the Working Time Regulations 1998, and that it was not just and equitable to extend time for the discrimination complaints under s.123 Equality Act 2010. No substantive merits findings or monetary award are recorded in this written judgment.

The judgment also states that the complaint of age discrimination was struck out by operation of the order of 24 June 2020, and notice of that fact was given under rule 38(1) of the Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2013.

Claims and outcomes

3 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Unfair dismissal	The tribunal referred to the s.111 ERA 1996 time-limit issue and found the claims were brought out of time; no separate merits determination is recorded in this judgment.	Dismissed	—	—
Working time regulations	The tribunal found the claimant was a worker within the WTR 1998, but held the claim was brought out of time under reg. 30; no remedy was awarded.	Dismissed	—	—
Age discrimination	The tribunal held it was not just and equitable to extend time under s.123 EqA 2010, and the age discrimination complaint was struck out by operation of the order dated 24 June 2020.	Struck out	Age	—

Legal tests applied

8 references

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.