Case 1601132/2021 · Employment Tribunal

Ms K Edwards v The Commissioners for her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs & Others — 2022

Case reference: 1601132/2021
Decision date: 17 March 2022
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Judge: Employment Judge S Moore Date

Indexed: 23 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

Ms K Edwards

Respondent

The Commissioners for her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs & Others

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

On the tribunal's own initiative, the earlier judgment striking out the claim against Mr Boston in 1601132/2021 was revoked because there had been no application to strike him out and the strike-out had been included in error. The tribunal said there were no grounds to say the claim against him had no reasonable prospect of success, and that it would not be in the interests of justice for the claimant to be denied the ability to pursue it because of that error.

The respondent's application for reconsideration of the refusal to strike out paragraphs 1 and 2 of claim 5 was refused. The tribunal said the claimant's allegation that Mr Boston's decision dated 7 May 2021 amounted to sexual harassment under s26 Equality Act 2010 remained a matter to be determined after evidence and submissions. It recorded that the claimant's case was not confined to s26(3) and that she could also advance a claim under s26(1) if she wished.

The claimant's reconsideration application in relation to the strike-out of paragraph 4(e) in claim 6 of 1601653/2021 was also refused. The tribunal said the time-limit issue had been listed for the 8 and 9 March 2022 hearing, that the claimant had had the opportunity to provide evidence then, and that no explanation was given for why any new evidence was not available at that hearing. It also refused the request to reconsider a deposit order on other subsections of paragraph 4 because a deposit order is a case management order, not a judgment.

Claims and outcomes

2 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Harassment	The tribunal revoked, on its own initiative, the earlier strike-out of the claim against Mr Boston because it had been included in error. It refused the respondent's reconsideration application and said the sexual harassment allegation under s26 Equality Act 2010 remained to be determined after evidence and submissions. The judgment also noted that the claimant could pursue the point under s26(1) as well as s26(3) if she wished.	Other	Sex	—
Other	Claim 6 in 1601653/2021 was referred to only by paragraph 4(e) in the reconsideration reasons, so the underlying complaint is not clearly identified in this judgment. The claimant said it might be out of time and asked for reconsideration on just and equitable grounds, but the tribunal refused the application and left the earlier strike-out in place.	Struck out	—	—

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.