Case 1600117/2022 · Employment Tribunal
Miss N Mosabbir v Hywel Dda University Health Board — 2022
- Case reference
- 1600117/2022
- Decision date
- 12 September 2022
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sharp
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss N Mosabbir
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe tribunal sat at Cardiff by CVP before Employment Judge C Sharp sitting alone. It dismissed the unfair dismissal and victimisation claims because they had been withdrawn by the claimant.
It also dismissed the race and religious discrimination complaints relating to incidents between December 2020 and May 2021, identified as Claims 1a-c in the agreed list of issues. Those complaints were found to have been presented outside the s123 Equality Act 2010 time limit, and the tribunal was not satisfied that it was just and equitable to extend time.
By contrast, the tribunal held that the separate race and religious discrimination complaint in Claim 1d, about removal from shifts in A & E and the failure to provide shifts and permit the claimant's return, could proceed because it was just and equitable to extend time. The judgment did not determine the merits of that complaint and recorded no remedy.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recordedThis 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | The unfair dismissal claim was dismissed because it had been withdrawn by the claimant. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Victimisation | The victimisation claim under s27 Equality Act 2010 was dismissed because it had been withdrawn by the claimant. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Race discrimination | Claims 1a-c, pleaded as race discrimination, were presented outside the s123 Equality Act 2010 time limit and the tribunal was not satisfied it was just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Religion or belief discrimination | Claims 1a-c, pleaded as religious discrimination, were presented outside the s123 Equality Act 2010 time limit and the tribunal was not satisfied it was just and equitable to extend time. | Dismissed | Religion or belief | — |
| Race discrimination | Claim 1d, concerning removal from shifts in A & E and the failure to provide shifts and permit the claimant's return, was found to be just and equitable to extend time and was allowed to proceed. No merits finding was made. | Other | Race | — |
Legal tests applied
2 references- s123 Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable to extend time
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.