Case 1803967/2018 · Employment Tribunal
Ms J Robertson v Local Care Force LLP — 2019
- Case reference
- 1803967/2018
- Decision date
- 7 August 2019
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Ainscough
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Ms J Robertson
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMs J Robertson brought three claims against Local Care Force LLP. At the preliminary hearing on 22 July 2019, Employment Judge Ainscough, sitting alone, held that the claim for the right not to suffer a detriment on the grounds of pregnancy was out of time under section 48(3)(a) ERA 1996. The tribunal found it was reasonably practicable for that claim to have been presented in time, so it was dismissed.
The tribunal also held that the claim for right to remuneration was out of time under section 70(2)(a) ERA 1996 and that it had been reasonably practicable to submit it within time, so that claim was dismissed. The pregnancy discrimination claim was also out of time under section 123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010, but the tribunal allowed a just and equitable extension of time under section 123(1)(b). The written record states that reasons were given orally, so no substantive merits decision is recorded in this judgment.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Other | Claim for the right not to suffer a detriment on the grounds of pregnancy under section 48(3)(a) ERA 1996; the tribunal found it was out of time and that it was reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Other | Claim for the right to remuneration under section 70(2)(a) ERA 1996; the tribunal found it was out of time and that it was reasonably practicable to submit it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Pregnancy discrimination claim; the tribunal found it was out of time under section 123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010 but allowed a just and equitable extension under section 123(1)(b). The written record does not record a substantive merits decision. | Other | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Legal tests applied
6 references- reasonably practicable
- section 48(3)(a) ERA 1996
- section 70(2)(a) ERA 1996
- section 123(1)(a) Equality Act 2010
- section 123(1)(b) Equality Act 2010
- just and equitable extension of 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.