Case 2202973/2022 · Employment Tribunal
In person v Respondent — 2023
- Case reference
- 2202973/2022
- Decision date
- 22 March 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Glennie
- Venue
- London Central
- Panel members
- Mr I Allwright, Mr R Miller
Parties
1 namedClaimant
In person
Respondent
- —
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal unanimously found that the complaint of harassment contrary to section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 was well founded. It upheld complaints 1(i), 1(iii), 2, 4, 5, 8 and 9 as harassment related to sex under section 26(1) and as sexual harassment under section 26(2), complaint 6 as harassment related to sex and sexual orientation, and complaints 1(ii) and 7 as harassment related to sex.
The Tribunal awarded £20,000 for injury to feelings. It also awarded past loss of earnings of £12,850.90 after deducting Universal Credit payments from gross earnings loss, and future loss of earnings of £4,212. Interest was awarded on injury to feelings and past loss of earnings, making the total sum payable by the Respondent £39,079.77.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harassment | The judgment found complaints 1(i), 1(iii), 2, 4, 5, 8 and 9 well founded as harassment related to sex and sexual harassment; complaint 6 as harassment related to sex and sexual orientation; and complaints 1(ii) and 7 as harassment related to sex. The award was not split by protected characteristic. | Upheld | Sex | — |
| Harassment | Complaint 6 was found well founded as harassment related to sex and related to sexual orientation. The award was not split by protected characteristic. | Upheld | Sexual orientation | — |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £39,080
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £17,063
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
3 references- section 26 of the Equality Act 2010
- section 26(1) Equality Act 2010
- section 26(2) Equality Act 2010
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.