Case 1808816/2023 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Louise Murdoch v Sierra 1 Security Stewarding Limited — 2024
- Case reference
- 1808816/2023
- Decision date
- 5 November 2024
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Venue
- Sheffield
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Louise Murdoch
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningMiss Louise Murdoch's claims against Sierra 1 Security Stewarding Limited were dismissed under rule 47 after she did not attend the hearing. The respondent attended by two directors and a representative. The Tribunal noted that it had already made an order on 28 March 2024 requiring the claimant to show cause why the claims should not be struck out as out of time, and later extended the deadline for written representations to 5 July 2024.
The Tribunal recorded that the claimant sent a document on 13 May 2024 setting out the amount she said was owed, but she did not explain why the claims were in time and did not request a hearing at that stage. No further representations were received after the extended deadline, and on 12 July 2024 the Tribunal issued a strike-out warning. No explanation was provided for the failure to attend the final hearing, and no application to postpone was made.
On the papers, the Tribunal found that the primary time limits under section 23(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and section 123 of the Equality Act 2010 had expired. It recorded that the claimant left employment on 28 February 2023 and that the claims were not presented until 4 December 2023, more than nine months later. The Tribunal held that the claimant had not shown that it was not reasonably practicable to present the unlawful deductions claim in time, or that the pregnancy and maternity discrimination claim should be allowed out of time on a just and equitable basis.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Treated as a claim about maternity pay said to be due and unpaid. Dismissed under rule 47; the Tribunal found it was presented outside the primary time limit and that the claimant had not shown it was not reasonably practicable to present it in time. | Dismissed | — | — |
| Pregnancy and maternity discrimination | Treated as a complaint about removal from a supervisors' course. Dismissed under rule 47; the Tribunal found it was out of time and that no basis for a just and equitable extension had been shown. | Dismissed | Pregnancy and maternity | — |
Legal tests applied
5 references- rule 47
- section 23(2) Employment Rights Act 1996
- section 123 Equality Act 2010
- not reasonably practicable
- just and equitable
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.